Assignments for Understanding the Christian World, Fall 2009.
Post your assignments below. All further comments and discussions should be posted under the thread entitled: "Comments on Assigments."
46 comments:
max pierre
said...
Reflection Paper! In the class, we are talking about two worlds: the Christian World and the other world. The other world called unconverted world. I will like to know if there are only two or three worlds because there are other people out there who believe in monotheist God who is not Christian; by example, the Jews believe in God and Abraham, the Muslim believed in God in Abraham, but the both do not believe in Jesus Christ like us Christian. The Muslin called their God Allah; they believed He is the God of all creation who made the heaven and the earth. Even in our own religion as we called it, Christian Religion have more than 200 big denominations, each of them don’t believe the other, and each claim they have the right message of the Gospel. Some Voodoo are fasting and praying too, and they claim that are Christian and they think they believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Many Christian don’t think they are going to heaven, but some of them think the only solution for the world is heaven because no other alternatives for this corrupt world. By the way, Seventh day Adventist believes the Sabbath is Saturday that it is a day of rest since the creation; however some other denomination s believe the Sabbath is Sunday because it was the day of Christ resurrection. Most people know by now, to be Christian is to follow Christ: believe that he died on the cross and resurrected that He is the Son of the living God. As of now, no one knows who has the right answer- sooner or later- one day, we all will stand in front of God to answer to every question in our life right or wrong.
Reflection paper #2 Apostle Paul said, “Our desire for you is Christ will live in your hearts by faith, and that you will come to know and understand with us the height and the depth and the width and the length of the Love of Christ. It surpasses all human knowledge. We pray that you can be filled with the fullness of God.” As Christian, we have different faith, and which faith he is talking about; a Christian should live by faith he or she has been received in Christ. How do we define faith? Some have faith in their power, other in their money, some other in the government; even in Christ, your believe will mattered one way or the other. I do not know how God is going to bring all this pieces together because when we are talking about Christian religions, we are really talking about many thousands worldview. We might accepted it or not, but we all have biases that affect the way we behave and live in this society that means our reality is different from some others. By example, if you are a supervisor in a job, you are looking for an employee that means you need to discriminate (there are good and bad discrimination) applicant to see the best qualify employees; your culture, your education, your belief, your family and your life experience are going to play a big part of it. Some psychologist said, our environment affects almost 50 percent the way we have behaving in acting in this society. As Paul continued to say, as a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. Ephe. 4:1-5
Refection Paper # 3 In the Theological Turning Points, the author talked about Christological Controversy “who is Jesus?” The problem most people have that they put the Divinity and the humanity of Christ in the same package- true had it may look like- in some respects He never been resign as God to become man nor to share our sinful nature with us that He had no propensity. If it’s the way to go, there will no reason to talk about the incarnation of Christ. When we said Jesus-Christ, we are talking about a combination – 100 percent man and 100 percent God. Jesus means God is salvation or salvation came from God; however, Christ means the Messiah. Jesus is the human nature of Christ, but Christ is the Divine nature of Christ. Jesus Christ is the combination between God/Man, between Divinityand Humanity, between son of Mary and Joseph/Son of God, between Heaven/Earth as the Bible refers too. The same name of Jesus is the same name of Joshua in the Old Testament; as Ellen White said, as Joshua had entered the promise land with the Israelis people from Egypt, He- Jesus will enter the Heavenly Canaan with the Christian Church. Jesus did not come just to die for us; the Bible said, the Plan of Redemption restores all that has been lost by sin. Ellen white said, when the earth is made new and becomes the eternal home of the saved, God’s original purpose in the creation of the world will have been fulfilled that Christ will even lose his body He had before the incarnation because of us. He put us in a better position we will never dream about if we were not sin. GOD'S GRACE overpowers our SINs! Adam had no plan one day that he thought he will go to heaven nor did he expect God will come to his planet. We should be proud for what Christ has done for us!
Reflection Paper #4 When I read the book: Theological Turning points –Anthropological Controversy. The author asked, what is humanity? Who knows! We could well say anything who is not God or angel is human. As we all know, there are other being living in the cosmos or other galaxies. For human, what are most people missing when they are talking about creation, “they said God created man in His likeness and His image.” But what we are saying about God is that He has a shape or form; however, it is not true: God has no hands, no eyes, no body, no time, no ears, no space and every “no” we can think about. Some people said, we are created with the dust of the earth, but God blow up in our nostrils that we became a human being - that is we are 100 percent human and 100 percent came from God. There is a problem with all views that we can think because our soul is not part of God either, but it just came from God and we became a human being. Sometimes, we can misread the Bible too; the Bible said, God was looking in the garden for Adam and Eve; if God was looking for them, He would not be omnipotent. He knows they were going to sin, where they were going to hide, and when He had to come. When we hide from God, we are going to God because He is where we are going to hide from His view. The book was talking about Adam sin was the reason that make us sin, it could be. The Bible said by one man too we all became sin also; however, by one man we all will save. The point I’m trying to make, Adam seems more of a participant than a player. Sin came to this world by Satan who tempted Adam and Eve, and we saved by incarnate Christ who did not sin. Both Satan and Christ came to our world to continue to fight each other, and Adam and Eve in their lack of knowledge had injected themselves in it.
Research Paper #5 In Theological Turning Point, the author was talking about baptism, he even said, “the baptism of Jesus is paradigm!” What is baptism of Jesus, and which format is acceptable? Over the ages, we have seen many different format; however, must Christians believe the only format is acceptable is immersion. The format the church has been practiced up to now, it’s not the model of Jesus, and it was not the type we had at the Pentecost. John the Baptist baptized people in Jordan River by self immersion! John was standing at the bank of the river (outside) with his parchment at his hands that was the procedures for the proselytes’ baptism to become Jew and The only way the apostles could baptized four thousands people in one day is by self immersion. The format we have right now is Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch when the two were in the water together. Some people might say, okay! The Bible said, two people were in the water, but the Ethiopian was eunuch that means he was disabling. I always asking myself, if I let someone baptized by himself or herself is that a problem with the church organization because no biblical proof to be in the water together.
In chapter 9, in Theological Turning point, the author was talking about eschatological controversy that is the Kingdom of God. It is true in the Old Testament, the Bible was taught about two kingdoms of God –one God would come as a King and would never die and the other one he would die for the sins of the world. The Jew had political problem at that time that they wanted the one God would come as King of Kings. Most of the Gospel, when they were talking about the kingdom of God, they were not talking about heaven. The book of Matthew was written for the Jew, it was a sin for them to mention the name of Yahweh instead Matthew put heaven. We need to be cautious, when the Bible refer to kingdom of God, the Bible talked about two kingdoms of God – one is the Kingdom of Glory and the other is the Kingdom of Grace. The Christian Church is the representation of the Kingdom of Grace as an embassy; the church was made to take people from darkness to bring to marvelous light. Anytime we as a Christian heard the word “Kingdom” we need to look for the king; as Christian Christ is our King because He is the head of the church. The other kingdom the Bible was referring too is the kingdom of grace that is when we all are with God forever and ever.
In chapter 9, in Theological Turning point, the author was talking about eschatological controversy that is the Kingdom of God. It is true in the Old Testament, the Bible was taught about two kingdoms of God –one God would come as a King and would never die and the other one he would die for the sins of the world. The Jew had political problem at that time that they wanted the one God would come as King of Kings. Most of the Gospel, when they were talking about the kingdom of God, they were not talking about heaven. The book of Matthew was written for the Jew, it was a sin for them to mention the name of Yahweh instead Matthew put heaven. We need to be cautious, when the Bible refer to kingdom of God, the Bible talked about two kingdoms of God – one is the Kingdom of Glory and the other is the Kingdom of Grace. The Christian Church is the representation of the Kingdom of Grace as an embassy; the church was made to take people from darkness to bring to marvelous light. Anytime we as a Christian heard the word “Kingdom” we need to look for the king; as Christian Christ is our King because He is the head of the church. The other kingdom the Bible was referring too is the kingdom of glory that is when we all are with God forever and ever.
I want to comments on Montes suggestion of Romans. When the Bible said, people without law; basically, the Bible refers to 10 Commandments sometimes the Old Testament. There are a lot of sins who were not part of the 10 Commandments or Old Testament. God has been talking in different ways and different manners even without the Law a person could see there is a God. I agree with you in that assessment “No society can progress without law. There would be chaos and upheavals day after day; week after week and all the time.” Do we (Theologians students)think when we go to heaven there will be Law? That we will have free will! If that is true, how God knew that we will not sin again.
To be fully human means to be fully spiritual In class the issue was raised that to be fully human means to be fully spiritual. I never thought of this concept before, but it makes perfect sense. Obviously God created man to be fully human or else God wouldn’t have created him. Man was made perfect and fully spiritual meaning that he was in perfect harmony with God. Then once man had fallen, not only did he descend spiritually but his humanity also descended and plummeted in an abysmal state. So now man is not only far from being fully spiritual but man is also sub-human. Therefore the only way to become fully human is to become fully spiritual or to be in perfect union with God the way God originally created it. This can only be done when those who are under the blood stain banner of Jesus Christ are glorified. This idea goes along with the view that Dr.Hanna presented about how human being can’t be human unless they are in healthy relationships to other. Just like the Father can’t be a Father without the Son and the Son can’t be the Son unless he had a Father. The same goes with a Husband and a Wife they cannot be husband and wife without relationship to each other. Therefore if we fail to make relationships and rub shoulders with others then we are denying our humanity. We were designed to be an community with each other and if we fail to do this then we are not only less loving but less then human. Keenan
Christological Controversy We have been discussing in class the fact that Christ was fully human and full divine and this doctrine is in fact comforting to me. I can see how the early church members and the Apostolic Fathers had to really come to a clear understanding of this point because it directly relates to Christ’s role as God (Trinity). With the various views of Christology that were presented in those early years, Docetism, Gnosticism, Ebionism, Monarchianism, etc., there needed to be some clear statement made that explained his humanistic qualities without denying his Godhood. I say that the ultimate prevailing decision that Christ is fully human and fully God is comforting to me because I know that through that humanity God has experienced, in a way, the same pains and sufferings that we all go through in life. I know that God knows and understands all, but it is so much more personal to me to know that Christ experienced humanity too. True he was sinless and as we mentioned was perhaps even “more human”, but he also took upon himself our sins, my sins, and experienced loss, fatigue, betrayal, physical pain, and anguish of soul and even death. Because of his personal experience of these things I know that when I am praying for help through a difficult time, God understands in a very personal way what I am going through and that means a lot to me
From this chapter on the Christological Controversy from Theological Turning Points I could see how the theme of God’s transcendence and how we understand God’s transcendence is part of the development of Christian doctrines. The Bible tells us that the Lord changes not (Mal. 3:6). But what does that mean? How does God change not? Because we believe Jesus to be Lord and yet he was born, grew, died and resurrected. He has gone from before the incarnation to be incarnated to now having a body that will last for all eternity. And yet Hebrews 13:8 tells us that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever.” I liked the discussion in class that pointed out that the context in Malachi is God’s mercy. So I wonder if God’s transcendence refers only to his Character. How we understand God’s transcendence is important because like Arius (p.31) it can lead some to deny the Divinity of Christ because he obviously does change physically. And though the Christian church has not said that God’s transcendence refers to his Character it seems that in the discussion of Christology they started to move that direction: Athanasius (p.32) says that “the incarnation of Jesus did not alter the transcendent status of Christ… [He] still exercises sovereignty over the universe while in a human body.
One more thing I could not help to notice from the chapter on the Christological Controversy in Theological Turning Points was the similarity on what Theodore of Mopsuestia, from the Antiochene School, said and what Mrs. White said. On page 36 it is said that Theodore understood the human nature of Jesus as “a ‘garment’ in which Christ’s body is wrapped.” And on page 90 of Dr. Hanna’s book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Hanna quotes Mrs. White: “Christ had not exchanged His divinity for humanity; but He had clothed His divinity in humanity. He veiled His divinity with the garb of humanity, but he did not part with his divinity.” It took me some more studying of the quotes from Dr Hanna on pp.87-90 to realize that she also agrees with Athanasius from the Alexandria School. Athanasius said “He [Jesus] became human. He did not enter into a human being” p. 32. Mrs. White said “The eternal Word consented to be made flesh. God became man.” “Christ did not make believe take human nature; He did verily take it. He did in reality possess human nature… He is declared to be a man.” Finally, I understood that the Chalcedon council of 451 affirmed the two natures, divine and human, of Christ and his singleness of personhood; which seems to me the same that Mrs. White has done. One question that remains in my mind is: Does this mean that Mrs. White confirms the decision taken on the Chalcedon council in regard to Jesus nature?
How does God know the future? Is it because God is timeless and is already in the future, present and past all at the same time? Or is it because God is temporal and has divine foreknowledge? I believe it is the latter. I believe that God is temporal and knows the future because he has divine foreknowledge. Now if you believe that Jesus is divine as well then that would mean that Jesus while on earth had divine foreknowledge. Now this poses some problems for me. If Jesus has divine knowledge then he knew where to be at the right time all the time. He knew where to position himself so that he could cross paths with those that needed healing. He knew that the woman at the well was going to be there at that specific time. Jesus knew the woman with the issue blood was going to touch him when she did. Jesus knew when he was going to be betrayed. Therefore Jesus would have known that he was going to die on the cross and be resurrected with no problems. However if that is the case then why is it that Jesus could not have seen beyond the cross? If he has divine foreknowledge then why did he have to pray to the Father to take this cup away from him? Why did the aguish of going to the cross make Jesus sweat drops of blood? Therefore somehow some way Jesus divine foreknowledge had to be cut off temporarily or was it? I do not claim to have the answer to this question with my feeble human mind, but I’m just posing the question that has to come up if Jesus is divine and has divine foreknowledge. Maybe you have the answer… Keenan
Response to Max #5 paper Max I agree that there is no scriptural evidence that John was actually in the water when Jesus was baptized. However I think that we must be careful and not take a dogmatic approach to this because there is no scriptural evidence that says John wasn’t in the water with Jesus. This is a subject that you brought up in another class and I do believe that it should be looked at some more. Good post! Keenan
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 2 - Reading the Book of Scripture
This chapter brings up the issue of Biblical authority. In it, Prof. Hanna asks why there are “so many disagreements concerning correct Christian faith”. (32) Which stirs me up to say, in order for the Scripture to be a final authority, it must have unity within itself. That is, the Bible cannot be divided; or else which of the parts would have greater authority? I have two young children. A common strategy my older son uses is to ask my wife and I both until he gets the answer he wants. We do so also with Scripture sometimes. If we do not like what the Old Testament says about God, we always have a court of appeals in the New Testament and vice versa. This is a very dangerous method of interpretation. As Bible students compare Scripture with Scripture, it must not be done in order to diminish the fact that circumstances alter cases, and that God's revelation is not always one size fits all. The whole Word of God should be brought to bear on a subject. If the majority of texts speak to one side of an issue, even so the minority should still be heard. And those of us with scholarly skills should not attempt to cover up the attempt to divide and conquer by appealing to the original languages or textual issues (unless it is warranted). Please do not pit the Old Testament against the New.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 6 - The Theme of the Bible is Jesus
Following up my previous comments on the essential unity of Scripture, it makes sense to take a look at what the Bible is unified on. Having been written by different people under different circumstances in different cultures and languages, there is a lot of variety represented within its pages. Notwithstanding, since it is all truth it bears a correspondence with reality and thus the creator of all things. As I was contemplating the theme of Jesus throughout Scripture, I realized that those who attempt to discount the prophetic witness of Christ in the Old Testament are actually attacking the gospel. The debate is not simply academic; it strikes to the heart of the character of God. Some religious speakers leave me with the impression that the God of the OT was vindictive and cruel, but Jesus finally was incarnated to make an appeasement. The same teachers contrast the brutality of the Israelite congregation with the alleged peacefulness of the Christian church. But this is fantasy. We find some of the most excellent stories of grace right in the OT: from Adam whose life was spared, to Isaac, to David, etc. And we also find in Christian history some of the most brutal tales of injustice.
Cosmic Christ: Reading the Book of Scripture I found the question and subsequent answer on how the Bible relates to the knowledge of the cosmos to be very interesting. Yes, the Bible is not a textbook for everything in life. We can’t open a chapter that talks about heroin addiction, internet pornography, or the possibilities of nuclear war. These are modern problems and if we search the Bible to find those kinds of modern specifics of course we will be left wanting. But like the chapter says, the Bible provides the framework on which we can approach and problem that life sends at us. There are basic principles taught throughout its pages that can be applied to any situation. Perhaps even more importantly it can help us put into perspective extra-biblical knowledge, like is mentioned. New knowledge, understanding, technology, and research is being discovered in all fields of study as time goes on, and while the bibles origins date to times long past it can still be applied to modern knowledge. With the Bible as our guide and companion we can put modern knowledge into its proper God inspired place and understanding and then face any challenges that might come our way
As I read the chapter on Ecclesiology, I noticed an interesting phenomenon. While McKim makes a point to discuss some of the Biblical ideas behind the concept of ecclesiology (as well as the others chapters of the book), I noticed that many of the ideas expressed from the church fathers did not seem to be Biblically supported. For example, a Donatist Bishop at one point says that there can be no baptism with the church. While I can understand why the church would want to say this, I struggled to be reminded of any sort of Biblical precedent for that statement. The second thing that I noticed was that at one point the author (I believe) is expressing an idea that the church must be unified. McKim goes on to write that Augustine believed that the opposite of love was schism and that schism is sacrilege. Once again, it seems that this type of statement is not based on a biblical idea but rather on our own reasoned ruminations on the subject. While the Bible does not necessarily cover all issues, I believe that it covers all principles and so we should be searching for those principles in order to inform our worldview.
On page 32 of his book Dr. Hanna makes an interesting statement. He writes, “At the same time, I propose that Scripture also guides the Christian in matters of knowledge.” I find this to be an interesting statement because I believe it more clearly expresses an idea often held by those described as “conservative” Christians. As I implied, I believe that statement is not adequately expressed by this group. Instead of saying that the Scriptures guide them in matters of knowledge, they instead state that Scripture is the source of all knowledge. The logical end of this position is that if the Bible does not state it, then it cannot be agreed to by those who hold a Christian worldview. Instead the focus should be on conforming our knowledge to the principles and the ideas found in Scripture. Therefore, if the information which other sources provide is compatible with the word of God, then we should not be against that knowledge simply because it did not come from the Bible or some other religious authority. On the other hand, if the Bible does not support that knowledge then it should be rejected. While the most applicable place where this can be found is in the world of science, I think it also applies to philosophy, politics, and even religion itself.
Brandon Smith September Assignment #1 Understanding the Christian World Chapter 6 – The Cosmic Christ of Scripture The Divine and Human Natures of Christ
Up until about two weeks ago, I cant say that I’ve ever really sat down and considered the AWESOME power in the statement that Jesus is both FULLY God and FULLY human at the same time!! The bible states that “God was manifest in the Flesh” in 1st Timothy 6:15 and when one truly reflects on this great truth, you cant help but get excited about the deep wisdom, creativity and love of God.
Now I understand that many are quite ambivalent about Jesus carrying a Human and Divine nature and their thoughts, questions and perspectives are completely valid due to the great complexity of God’s ways of doing things. However, I believe that as wide and as deep as this issue is concerning Christ’s dual natures, there comes a breaking point in all human analysis, that challenges the human mind to either BELIEVE Jesus is what the bible says he is or reject all that is revealed about him. In respect to Dr. Hanna and his aggressive desire to inspire God’s disciples to think long and hard about the important elements of life they confess as their own, I personally believe that Faith isn’t FULLY explaining everything to the point where one is all knowing in one area, rather it is embracing the substance of things hoped for and not seen simply because of a deep abiding trust in the God who has clearly revealed himself over and over and over in the personal life.. Without this encounter, the circles of explanation and interpretation will continue to spin round and round until human life is no more..
Brandon Smith September Assignment #2 Understanding the Christian World Class Lecture Christ’s decision to “Do Right”
A couple of weeks ago, we discussed the dual nature of Christ in class and for this particular blogspot entry, I want to just give a couple of reactions to some of the rich dialogue we had.
When I think about Jesus living in the flesh for 33 years without sinning, I cant help but marvel at how strong his connection was with the Father in heaven. I guess this concept means a lot to me right now because as a sincere son seeking to enjoy mr relationship with the creator, I candidly have to say that sometimes I get a little frustrated in trying to stay under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I mean there are times when I KNOW I shouldn’t be making a decision to fall into sin yet even despite my BEST effort, I end up in sin only to painfully look back in the rear view mirror and wonder “what will it take to truly overcome”…
My question to you guys tonight as colleges is… as you guys struggle with your most challenging sins, what strategies have you used that keep a strong communion with God and foster a more dependent relationship with him. There are many that I use myself but I’m totally open to the victorious experiences of others to assist me in my day to day walk with Christ.
Cosmic Christ: The Theme of the Bible is Jesus In this part of Dr. Hanna’s book I was impressed with the section on how Jesus is the restorer of full human personhood. I know we talked about this in class a bit but it really struck me this time when reading it. Sin is not a part of the full human personhood; God did not create fallen-man. Yet we cannot overcome this part of our now fallen nature without Jesus. He also mentions how because or Christ we can eventually partake of the divinity of God. As we turn to him and let ourselves be filled with the Holy Spirit we can become more like our full human potential. I can’t help but look at Christ’s life as portrayed in the New Testament and the example he lived and wonder if that is not how a person in full personhood should behave. I think it is and realize that this is only possible by aligning oneself with the will of God. This, in turn, in only possible by turning to Christ and letting him fill our every day lives. Then we can start to be more “fully human.”
Soteriological Controversy I thought it interesting that our book points out that the development of the doctrine of salvation took several centuries and is still going through development today (page 79). I guess this stems from what one means by “salvation.” The fact that our book points out seven different meanings for “salvation,” all founded in the biblical text, goes to show why a full and complete understanding of what this really means is ongoing. But no matter what definition is attached to the word “salvation,” it is something that we, human beings, need and in every form. Salvation in every respect is something that we cannot achieve on our own; every form of real salvation comes about because of Jesus Christ. We would do well to remember that fact whether we are seeking freedom, peace with God, reconciliation, forgiveness from sin, justification, and/or redemption. Christ is the key and we need to turn to him for any and all of these and we need to be able and willing to help others to know where to turn in order to receive the same.
I found a very interesting concept in the chapter on soteriology in McKim’s book. In the early church there were many ways of viewing salvation that were proposed by different church fathers. What was interesting to me about this fact was that all of the ways of looking at salvation that McKim expressed all had validity to them. Many of the apostolic fathers saw salvation as illumination – the knowledge of what Christ gave to us in His time on Earth. I think this definitely has elements of truth in it. Irenaeus saw salvation as restoration. Salvation certainly has an element of restoring us to a right relationship with God. Tertullian saw it as satisfaction – fulfilling a debt that had been created by our sin. That seems to have elements of truth in it as well. Origen saw salvation as victory, and Christ’s death, which allows for salvation is certainly a victory over the power of the devil. Athansius and the Eastern theologians saw salvation as deification. Now that seems to be tenuous at first glance, until you realize that they are discussing the deification that will take place for all the saved at the end of time. Finally, Augustine looked at salvation as justification, which seems obvious to me as well. What I credit Augustine for is the fact even in his model of justification he attempted to meld many of the former models together under the umbrella of justification.
On page 71 of his book, Dr. Hanna quotes John 5: 39-40 where Christ says, “You search the Scriptures because you think in them you have eternal life. The Scriptures testify of me; and yet you would not come to Me for life. This verse has always given me some pause. I often wonder if we as Christians today are not making the same mistakes that the Pharisees made when Jesus made this statement. We too have Scriptures. Is it possible that we rely on the Scriptures too much? Are we not technically in the same position as the Pharisees of Jesus’ day? Are we not just as able to go to Jesus for life as well? While I am not trying to say that we should not consult the Scriptures at all, I think I am willing to say that the individual revelations of Christ in our individual lives should take a place that is above Scripture. I think some might say in response that we should use the Scriptures as a way of knowing what Christ is saying to us. But I am not sure if that is accurate either. Doesn’t the Bible itself have stories of requests from God that do not seem to be in line with what God has established in the Bible as rules to live by? For example, God tells Abraham to kill Isaac even though God says that murder is wrong. I don’t know the answer to this question, but I do believe that we probably need to focus more on our individual relationships with Christ.
After my presentation in class, you know that I have been interested in the topic of baptism. I figured I would post on chapter 7 (Sacramental Controversy) from McKim. Suddenly I have some things to say on this issue. I have posited the thesis that differences in baptismal practice are not primarily rooted in culture, tradition, or convenience but rather in beliefs. Beliefs say what are the parameters in which the other secondary influences of culture, etc. effect the practice. For example, we believe from Romans 6 that baptism represents the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. But is the act enough to provide salvation; does it literally eliminate sin? The book raises questions about infant baptism or put another way, unduly deferring baptism. Perhaps the key to understanding baptism is as an entrance to the Christian community. Or as a sealing in recognition of God's elect (before the foundation of the world - whatever we mean by that). Or an outward means of communicating an inward grace. The beliefs are diverse. It is good that as Adventists we allow for profession of faith, open communion, and child dedication. It is also good that we are willing to struggle a little to determine where the boundaries are if we want membership to be on a truly spiritual basis.
I've been thinking about chapter 3 of the Cosmic Christ of Scripture. Dr. Hanna explains that Christ, Scripture and the cosmos all have primacy in a certain sphere. There is one supreme written revelation of what is true. There is another supreme being that is the center of all theology. And there is one reality that serves as the backdrop for everything that truly exists. Scripture is the supreme written word that points to Jesus. The Bible also tells us whether our perceptions of nature are rooted in the truth. Christ is unique as the express image of the invisible God. If you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father. And the cosmos is unique as the context for divine revelation. In a way it functions as a medium in which God communicates with man. The primacies are different: epistemological, ontological, and contextual; even so, it reveals some limitations to the sola scriptura principle in areas other than epistemology. We cannot use the Bible as a divinity in and of itself. Nor does it define our existence. So there is unity in diversity. We have the Scriptures. We have Jesus Christ. And we have the immeasurable cosmos to explore throughout the ages of the ages.
The invisible and visible Church Jesus says in John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. What is the visible church? I think the visible church isn’t just limited to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. I believe the visible church is all who claim to be Christian. No matter which denomination you are in as long as that denomination proclaims Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. That denomination could be Catholic or one that believes in handling and being bitten by snakes. Truly only God can judge how much light that individual is living up to. Therefore it doesn’t matter what denomination that person is in as long as their faithful. The invisible church is all those that are living up to the amount of light that has been giving to them. It doesn’t matter if that person is in a Christian denomination or not. I believe that if a person is a Muslim or Hindu or whatever else and that is all that they know then he or she is in the invisible Church. At the End of the day the individual that is faithful to the Light given them is in God’s invisible church.
Mission Minded Church Dr Hanna said in class on 10/27/09 that people who join the church need to understand that they’re signing up for a mission. Today the church isn’t mission minded. The church especially in the North American Division is truly in its Laodicean slumber. As a church we claim that we are protestant but in practice we are Catholic. Our members look to the Pastor to do everything. In theory they want the Pastor to do Evangelism, visit the people and just babysit the members. This way of thinking has become detrimental to our church. It has become detrimental because if something were to happen to that Pastor then it seems as if the Church cannot function. I think that our members fall to this abysmal state of mind because they haven’t been trained, equip and empowered to be mission minded. Our members have become spectators. In a consumer age we have a consumer church. A church that doesn’t want anything to do with mission but rather consume then produce. Remedy I believe the only true remedy that will awaken our church out of our Laodicean slumber is persecution. I think it will take persecution to awaken us as church to become mission minded. Then the people that are just playing Church will leave and the ones that lay dormant will awaken and to awaken others. Keenan
Theological Turning Points Today For the last of these blog entries for the semester I felt it fitting to comment a bit on along the lines of the last chapter in McKim’s book. Although we didn’t get to all of them in class, the book covers nine major turning points in the history of Christian thought yet he only goes as far as the Reformation on an on these points. This last chapter very briefly looks at some more current issues. Just for your own thinking I would say, what other major turning points in Christian thought do we consider to have taken place since the time of the Reformation? What chapter(s) could we add to this book and what additions could we add to how these nine main points have progressed since the time of the Reformation? I found this kind of reflection to be fun and interesting. One more theoretical question, do you see any major theological turning points in Christianities’ near/immediate future and if so what are they? How about specifically in the future of the Seventh-day Adventist Church? I think these questions would have made for a fun class discussion.
Cosmic Christ: A Wholistic Model Dr. Hanna makes a comment in a footnote in page129 that really rings true to me and helps to support his “wheel model.” He says, “Christ as the grand central theme of Scripture permits a proper biblical emphasis on the dub-themes of scripture. Each theme of scripture must be given its rightful place in relation to Christ.” He goes on to then show that the cosmos can be related/connected to scripture and then that all scripture is centered around and points to Christ. So in t very real sense we should be able to see God all around us. When we look at the world we live in, even in today’s modern and crazy world we can find connections to Christ all around us. Our study of Scripture will help us to make these connections. In turn as we study Scripture we should be able to see how it is relating to Christ in at any given point. So ask yourself this the next time you are reading a favorite passage form the Old Testament, or looking closer at Paul’s letters. Even if Christ Himself is not mentioned we can find how it relates to Him and His teachings. Jacob Moody
As I wrestle with the issue of the state of the dead for my paper I keep being sent back to two chapters in Theological Turning Point: Chapter 4 (The Anthropological Controversy) and Chapter 5 (The Soteriological Controversy). The inter-connection of these two chapters is very clear but something has always seemed to be missing. After going over the areas that I have underlined in chapter 4, for the 3rd time, it just done on me that in the 5th century when the controversy over the nature of man took place, the theologians back then only dealt with one part of the issue. I find it interesting that when the author gives the biblical basis about the nature of humanity he emphasizes how the Old Testament view “is a basic wholeness of the person rather than a duality or plurality of parts (p.62).” And in the New Testament, and especially in the writing of Paul, we also see the same Old Testament “perspective that unites the constituent parts of a person… body and soul do not indicate individual and exclusive entities but are rather terms applied to the whole personality (p.63).” But in the anthropological controversy in the 5Th century theologians assumed a duality – “humans are perceived as dichotomous, composed of body and soul (p.65).” And it is from this point of view (that a human being is a dichotomous being) that the controversy is argued. The theologian try to understand what does it mean to be created in God’s image, and what impact does sin had in the individual nature, in particular the ability to decide to sin or not to sin – Does man have a free will and what does that mean? The issue of duality vs. monism was never argued nor a final position decided by the Christian church. Roberto
I was excited by page 160 which revealed that Luther had a strong concern that the world would end before the Scriptures were translated into German. This is in contrast to many of his time such as Calvin who would rather not talk about the millennium in literal terms, at least as they understood it to be a time of Christ's reign on a sinful earth. In my recent paper, I made an argument that practice is caused by belief so there may be some general implications here. First, a belief in the soon coming of the literal kingdom of God can compel people to do some very rebellious things with the expectation that the consequences are not so important in light of eternity. Second, those who do not believe in a literal coming kingdom may regard those who do as unenlightened, ignorant, or simply over-optimistic. The distinct impression I get from some writings is that people simply do not think that God cares about human history enough to intervene. Colossians 3:2 urges us to set our minds on things that are above, not on things on the earth. In this way teachings like the second coming are part of unique Adventist spirituality. The expectation of the coming kingdom transforms our lives.
To comment on page 83 and following, I think there has been an overreaction to the concept of salvation as deification; we're leaning now to the other extreme in our tendencies of interpretation. Many people desire to preserve the eternal humility of human beings for sin at the expense of many clear passages that indicate our glorification. This is a mistake. It's one thing to correct and say no, we're not going to become gods. But it's another thing to say, well Jesus promised those who overcome will sit with him on his throne (Rev. 3:21) BUT that throne is going to be carted to some private room or something so that nobody gets any honor or anything for being there with Jesus. In fact, it is an honor to sit on the throne with Jesus. It's an honor for the 144,000 to sing a song that no one else can sing except those who were redeemed from the earth (Rev. 14:3). It's an honor to sit in judgment over angels (1 Corinthians 6:3). So those who over-correct from the teaching of salvation as deification go too far. It's better to acknowledge plainly that when Jesus took on humanity, he lifted the race higher than it was at creation. Now we are a spectacle to the universe to behold the great love of God (1 Corinthians 4:9).
As I continue to try to understand how a person’s view of human nature affects his view of salvation, I noticed that Origen is a good example. Some scholars believe that Origin had a Universalist view for the fate of those that die – so that everybody will make it to heave. I wonder how we classify Origin as so. In regard human nature we are told that he was heavily influenced by Neo-Platonism, so he believe that God had created the souls and when a soul sin it took on flesh as a human being (p.67) (a dualistic view). Then the souls that repent and follow God become His angels and those that do not accept Christ’s merits become angels of the devil (p.68). In regard salvation, Origen uses the theme of ransom to explain his view. Christ gives his soul to the devil in exchange for all the other souls, but neither Satan nor death can hold the soul of Christ because it is too good. It seems that at the end every soul is rescued and only Satan and death are left to be destroyed. I find it interesting that while human the souls had a free will and could choose to become angels of God or angels of the devil. But once Christ overcame every soul that became an angel of the devil is rescued and perhaps is turned into an angel of God. There is no choice for the fallen angels. They too will be rescued. Perhaps, there is an assumption that they remain evil angels against their will. Roberto
On the last page of Hanna’s book, Hanna cites George Reid who issues a double challenge to Adventists. The first challenge is that we have to continue to do theology in light of God as the center of universe and divine revelation as a monitor for all knowledge. The second challenge is to develop approaches that are responsive to cultural values including science. This is such an interesting concept. I find that many Christians are resistant to this type of challenge. I have a hard time understanding why. I think some people are just afraid that if they open themselves up to this type of challenge that they will be swept away into worldliness. However, I think it is Justas damaging to do some of the things that we do now, which is related to the first challenge. We often, in my opinion, do not create theology with God as the center and revelation as the monitor. Too often we allow culture to dictate what we believe and then say that our beliefs are based on the Word of God. While the word, one of God’s divine revelations gives us principles by which to live, it does not cover every conceivable circumstance. We must be willing to realize this and give people the freedom to make choices based off of the divine revelation revealed to them.
I was incredibly struck by McKim’s last chapter, which summarized where some of the historical theological issues of the church are today. This reminded me of a very important idea which we have touched on a couple of times throughout this course. In this course we have talked about the biblical concept of the path of just shining brighter and brighter until the perfect day and how that relates to the increase in knowledge. The SDA church promotes this idea with the concept of present truth. However, McKim makes the point that you can’t increase in knowledge if you are unwilling to move off of the theological position you currently hold. Every increase in knowledge that helped us better understand God, or Christology, or anthropology came because someone was willing to disagree with what was widely believed at the time. Because we do not fully understand everything, it means that in order for the Christian worldview to be perfected, we will have to be willing to move from the theological positions we now hold. I have no idea what we do not understand as well as we should, or where we can make progress, but I am deeply concerned that our religion will become stagnant if we continue to maintain the status quo and do not seek to come to a greater knowledge of who God is and what he requires of us.
Soteriology How are we saved? One of the major turning points in history of Christian Theology is Soteriology. The controversy between Pelagius and Augustine prove to identify some of the problems that the 5th century church had with humanity and the power of sin. Once the debate over humanity and the power of sin was somewhat solved, next was to understand the Doctrine of Salvation. Pelagius and Augustine viewed sin as something that can be overcome and a relationship with Jesus restored. The doctrine of atonement and salvation go hand and hand with the doctrine of salvation. Still there was no clear doctrine on salvation until Martin Luther. I think Martin Luther made one of the most major contributions to the doctrine of Salvation. Martin Luther clearly shed the most light on the doctrine of salvation. Martin Luther challenged the Church with Justification by faith as a means of salvation. The Church at that time taught that Christ didn’t complete the work of salvation. The Church believed in a sense that Christ did 99% of the work while man is left to do 1% of the work when it comes to salvation. This is what Martin Luther spoke out against and made the biggest contributions to as far Soteriology.
Soteriology How are we saved? One of the major turning points in history of Christian Theology is Soteriology. The controversy between Pelagius and Augustine prove to identify some of the problems that the 5th century church had with humanity and the power of sin. Once the debate over humanity and the power of sin was somewhat solved, next was to understand the Doctrine of Salvation. Pelagius and Augustine viewed sin as something that can be overcome and a relationship with Jesus restored. The doctrine of atonement and salvation go hand and hand with the doctrine of salvation. Still there was no clear doctrine on salvation until Martin Luther. I think Martin Luther made one of the most major contributions to the doctrine of Salvation. Martin Luther clearly shed the most light on the doctrine of salvation. Martin Luther challenged the Church with Justification by faith as a means of salvation. The Church at that time taught that Christ didn’t complete the work of salvation. The Church believed in a sense that Christ did 99% of the work while man is left to do 1% of the work when it comes to salvation. This is what Martin Luther spoke out against and made the biggest contributions to as far Soteriology.
One fold John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. I agree with Dr Hanna’s notion that God has sheep in the church and in the world. I believe that God does have people that will be saved and in heaven that never stepped foot into any Christian Church. James 4:17 says: “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” Therefore to all those who live up to the light that has been given them they will be saved. This should keep Christians in all denominations humble. This should point out to all Christians that there are people in other denominations that will be in heaven. There are sheep in all Christian denominations. There will be people that proclaimed to be Christians who have never keep a Sabbath day Holy or who have ever heard of an investigative judgment. There are also sheep that God has that aren’t a part of any Church. These sheep may not be a part of any Church but they are staying faithful to what they know. If they never heard the gospel of Jesus Christ but all they know is to do good then that as what they will be held accountable for. Christians in all denominations should remain humble because Jesus said that he has other sheep that are not of this fold. This should also drive the Christian to ever evaluate himself to see if he is in right relationship with God.
On the 1st day of September, Dr.Hanna mentioned the doctrinal development."The church has progressed and developed in the understanding of truth".It was quite awakening to learn that not just the scholars, but "even" the church has developed in the understanding of truth. It means that the doctrines that Seventh-day Adventist church has today are the production of such progress. And also there was an order in the development of the doctrines:The doctrine was developed from the OT to the NT. God has been revealing Himself in the history over time: The OT believers didn't believe that Jesus was God, Messiah and the Comforter and they had to expand the concept of God or reject Christ. Sometimes I think to myself:'What kind of life with what kind of concept about God would I have lived as a Christian if I had been born in the Middle Ages?' and I'm thankful to God that I'm living in this modern times because I could enjoy the brighter light of knowing God than before in the history.
Prov. 4:18 The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining ever brighter till the full light of day.
I think the divinity and the humanity of Christ is the key factor in understanding in the image of Christ and in growing to it too. I don't believe that we can fully understand both nature that God has with my human perspective but at least I agree with the notion that Dr. Hanna said in class even though I don't think I can experience both experiences in the real life: everything divine is experienced by humanity and everything human is experienced by divinity. And the concept about the communication of the divinity and humanity was quite myterious: Divine God is human and human God is divine and yet divinity doesn't become humanity and the humanity doesn't become divinity.What the Father does, the Son does and what the Son does, the Holy Spirit does. As a human being, we could experience divinity through humanity but we couldn't experience humanity through divinity because we're not divine. However, I think we need to know and remeber that we're the partakers of the Holy Spirit ever since we're called by God and are in the process of being restored because God's Spirit which is the power of redemption has been working in us powerfully. We're God's descendant and still experience Him because God communicates with us through His Spirit and we grow into the image of Christ. I'm thankful that God is a God of communication with His full divinity and humanity.
-4 levels of human worldview by Helminiak(The best way of realizing reality to Christinas)
Learning this in class was a surprising blessing to me because I could interpret and understand the process of struggling of a view of life since teenaged years learning this leves of worldview. Through my own experience, I know how important to have the right worldview which becomes the base of the healthy perspective of life. The 1st level is "Positivist level" which asks "What is the fact?" The 2nd level is "Philosophical level" and it asks what the meaning and value of the fact. The 3rd level is "Theistic level" which seeks to find the ultimate truth which is God. Lastly, the 4th level is about the communication between God and man which is theo-poetic. This also shows that the order of the development of the worldview. The development of the worldview starts with seeking for facts. If we can't discover facts, we can't ask the meaning and the value to ourselves. Through the process of asking the philosophical questions, we can meet the ultimate truth which is ultimate reality, God. But we're not supposed to stop there. We need to go to the level where we can communicate with God and we can build up the right worldview through growing in the knowledge of knowing God more and more. So, through the experience, we can become a partakers in the divine nature and can develop the Christian worldview. What I've learned from these levels of human worldview is that if we fail in building up the healthy worldview, our life can go astray and can be a sacrifice of the wrong worldview. God wants us to build up the healthy Christian worldview and Christian identity so we can live our life according to His good will for us and in the prosecc we would be able to be tranformed into the image of Christ.
4th Comment on Chapter 4: Increasing Secular and Spiritual Knowledge Q.Do we need to increase "secular" knowledge? Ellen White suggests that we should go to and fro to increase spiritual and "secular" knowledge. Unfortunately many Christians shirk their responsibility to increase spiritual knowledge. I agree with the responsibility that we have to increase knowledge. However, it's surprising to read that we're supposed to increase even the "secular" knowledge not just the spiritual knowledge. Dr.Hanna wrote that "well-organized work must be donein the church, that its members may understand the manner in which thay may impart light to others, and thus strengthen their own faith and increase their knowledge." White refers to Christ and Christian experience as channels of revelation. The students should improve every moment to increase their knowledge. Why? It's because they may put it to practical use as laborers together with God for the help and blessing of their fellow men. So I got to know why we need to know secular knowledge. We can't live our life away from the world but have to stay in this world. However, we aren't supposed to belong to this world because we're of Go, not of this world. we should use every single day to increase logical, experimental, temporal and spiritual knowledge. God desires His workers to gain daily a better understanding of how to reason "logically" from cause to effect, arriving at wise, safe conclusions. There is need of knowledge that is the fruit of experience. "We should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual thngs." What a great duty it is as a Christian!!! But accepting any doctrine or percept, we should demand a plain 'Thus saus the Lord' in its support. Speaking of which, Christians have to know both sides of reality: spiritual and secular.That's why Christians who are born of the Holy Spirit become the head whereever they are. Thank God for the knowledge that He revealed to us through the Scripture, Christ and the nature. Everything in this world is the revelation of God!
5th Comment on chapter 7 of "The cosmic Christ of Scripture"
-Christ centered connection The book writes that "For Ellen White, the Christ centered connections of divine and human persons involve three overlapping themes of Scripture." 1. God has created humanity in the image of divinity. 2. The corporate nature of humanity is indicated in the identification of all humanity with the first man-Adam, and with Christ-the last Adam. 3. Jesus is the Restorer of full human personhood: Since human persons exist in bodily form, Jesus restores human personhood in His human body and in the Church which is His spiritual body.Jesus restores human personhood by making it possible for human persons to become partakers of divine nature through the divine-human personhood of Christ. The proper destiny of humanity is this unity with divinity.
Reading what Dr.Hanna wrote in this chapter about what Ellen White had thought of the connection between Jesusd humanity and His divinity, I had some time to ponder on the importance of humanity and on how seriously God takes the humanity. I think it's really crucial to realize how God deals with the humanity in Jesus because we were created in the image of God and Jesus was too. Moreover, Jesus is our model of how we have to live an earthly life. God put social nature in humans like God,Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one in unity and they coorperate in the relationship with one another. We are supposed to know that Jesus who came down to earth bore out sin and the price was paid. Thirdly, we need to know that we are the partakers of divine nature and can be restored to our full potential as persons. Jesus came to this world as a full human and lived as a full human and worked for the full redemption for the mankind. So there's a hope for us as partakers of divinity that we can live like Jesus and be a channel for Jesus' restoring work for the mankind. Praise the Lord because Jesus took the full humanity even though He is God.
Q. What does the Bible say about the Mind of Christ? 6 Greek words from the Pauline epistles are translated as "mind". 5 factors common to all human beings are soul(psuche), opinion(gnome), throughts(noema), dispositions(phronema), and intellect(dianoia). And the 6th one is word(nous) which is the seat of understanding and conviction and the content of our minds. Dr.Hanna wrote that a "mind-set" or "worldview" will result from God's gifts of wisdom and spiritual perception, or the lack of these. Fortunately, worldview may be changed and renewed:we can be transformed by the radical metamorphosis(anakainoo) of your mind (or worldview)".
It's crucially significant matter that what kind of worldview we have because through the worldview we have, everything will be evaluated and judged. Therefore we need to have the mindset(worldview) of Christ so we could live our earthly life like Jesus did and could be more like Him. And the knowledge of gospel which is the Word of wisdom, not the natural knowledge or false science, will make us live a spiritual life. It's a great discovery for me that I haven't ever thought that the "mind of Christ" is the perfect worldview! Yes, Jesus' mind is the best worldview!
46 comments:
Reflection Paper!
In the class, we are talking about two worlds: the Christian World and the other world. The other world called unconverted world. I will like to know if there are only two or three worlds because there are other people out there who believe in monotheist God who is not Christian; by example, the Jews believe in God and Abraham, the Muslim believed in God in Abraham, but the both do not believe in Jesus Christ like us Christian.
The Muslin called their God Allah; they believed He is the God of all creation who made the heaven and the earth. Even in our own religion as we called it, Christian Religion have more than 200 big denominations, each of them don’t believe the other, and each claim they have the right message of the Gospel.
Some Voodoo are fasting and praying too, and they claim that are Christian and they think they believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
Many Christian don’t think they are going to heaven, but some of them think the only solution for the world is heaven because no other alternatives for this corrupt world. By the way, Seventh day Adventist believes the Sabbath is Saturday that it is a day of rest since the creation; however some other denomination s believe the Sabbath is Sunday because it was the day of Christ resurrection.
Most people know by now, to be Christian is to follow Christ: believe that he died on the cross and resurrected that He is the Son of the living God. As of now, no one knows who has the right answer- sooner or later- one day, we all will stand in front of God to answer to every question in our life right or wrong.
Reflection paper #2
Apostle Paul said, “Our desire for you is Christ will live in your hearts by faith, and that you will come to know and understand with us the height and the depth and the width and the length of the Love of Christ. It surpasses all human knowledge. We pray that you can be filled with the fullness of God.”
As Christian, we have different faith, and which faith he is talking about; a Christian should live by faith he or she has been received in Christ. How do we define faith? Some have faith in their power, other in their money, some other in the government; even in Christ, your believe will mattered one way or the other.
I do not know how God is going to bring all this pieces together because when we are talking about Christian religions, we are really talking about many thousands worldview. We might accepted it or not, but we all have biases that affect the way we behave and live in this society that means our reality is different from some others. By example, if you are a supervisor in a job, you are looking for an employee that means you need to discriminate (there are good and bad discrimination) applicant to see the best qualify employees; your culture, your education, your belief, your family and your life experience are going to play a big part of it. Some psychologist said, our environment affects almost 50 percent the way we have behaving in acting in this society.
As Paul continued to say, as a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. Ephe. 4:1-5
Refection Paper # 3
In the Theological Turning Points, the author talked about Christological Controversy “who is Jesus?” The problem most people have that they put the Divinity and the humanity of Christ in the same package- true had it may look like- in some respects He never been resign as God to become man nor to share our sinful nature with us that He had no propensity. If it’s the way to go, there will no reason to talk about the incarnation of Christ. When we said Jesus-Christ, we are talking about a combination – 100 percent man and 100 percent God. Jesus means God is salvation or salvation came from God; however, Christ means the Messiah. Jesus is the human nature of Christ, but Christ is the Divine nature of Christ. Jesus Christ is the combination between God/Man, between Divinityand Humanity, between son of Mary and Joseph/Son of God, between Heaven/Earth as the Bible refers too. The same name of Jesus is the same name of Joshua in the Old Testament; as Ellen White said, as Joshua had entered the promise land with the Israelis people from Egypt, He- Jesus will enter the Heavenly Canaan with the Christian Church.
Jesus did not come just to die for us; the Bible said, the Plan of Redemption restores all that has been lost by sin. Ellen white said, when the earth is made new and becomes the eternal home of the saved, God’s original purpose in the creation of the world will have been fulfilled that Christ will even lose his body He had before the incarnation because of us. He put us in a better position we will never dream about if we were not sin. GOD'S GRACE overpowers our SINs! Adam had no plan one day that he thought he will go to heaven nor did he expect God will come to his planet. We should be proud for what Christ has done for us!
Reflection Paper #4
When I read the book: Theological Turning points –Anthropological Controversy. The author asked, what is humanity? Who knows! We could well say anything who is not God or angel is human. As we all know, there are other being living in the cosmos or other galaxies. For human, what are most people missing when they are talking about creation, “they said God created man in His likeness and His image.” But what we are saying about God is that He has a shape or form; however, it is not true: God has no hands, no eyes, no body, no time, no ears, no space and every “no” we can think about.
Some people said, we are created with the dust of the earth, but God blow up in our nostrils that we became a human being - that is we are 100 percent human and 100 percent came from God. There is a problem with all views that we can think because our soul is not part of God either, but it just came from God and we became a human being.
Sometimes, we can misread the Bible too; the Bible said, God was looking in the garden for Adam and Eve; if God was looking for them, He would not be omnipotent. He knows they were going to sin, where they were going to hide, and when He had to come. When we hide from God, we are going to God because He is where we are going to hide from His view.
The book was talking about Adam sin was the reason that make us sin, it could be. The Bible said by one man too we all became sin also; however, by one man we all will save. The point I’m trying to make, Adam seems more of a participant than a player. Sin came to this world by Satan who tempted Adam and Eve, and we saved by incarnate Christ who did not sin. Both Satan and Christ came to our world to continue to fight each other, and Adam and Eve in their lack of knowledge had injected themselves in it.
Research Paper #5
In Theological Turning Point, the author was talking about baptism, he even said, “the baptism of Jesus is paradigm!” What is baptism of Jesus, and which format is acceptable? Over the ages, we have seen many different format; however, must Christians believe the only format is acceptable is immersion. The format the church has been practiced up to now, it’s not the model of Jesus, and it was not the type we had at the Pentecost.
John the Baptist baptized people in Jordan River by self immersion! John was standing at the bank of the river (outside) with his parchment at his hands that was the procedures for the proselytes’ baptism to become Jew and The only way the apostles could baptized four thousands people in one day is by self immersion.
The format we have right now is Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch when the two were in the water together. Some people might say, okay! The Bible said, two people were in the water, but the Ethiopian was eunuch that means he was disabling. I always asking myself, if I let someone baptized by himself or herself is that a problem with the church organization because no biblical proof to be in the water together.
In chapter 9, in Theological Turning point, the author was talking about eschatological controversy that is the Kingdom of God. It is true in the Old Testament, the Bible was taught about two kingdoms of God –one God would come as a King and would never die and the other one he would die for the sins of the world. The Jew had political problem at that time that they wanted the one God would come as King of Kings. Most of the Gospel, when they were talking about the kingdom of God, they were not talking about heaven. The book of Matthew was written for the Jew, it was a sin for them to mention the name of Yahweh instead Matthew put heaven. We need to be cautious, when the Bible refer to kingdom of God, the Bible talked about two kingdoms of God – one is the Kingdom of Glory and the other is the Kingdom of Grace. The Christian Church is the representation of the Kingdom of Grace as an embassy; the church was made to take people from darkness to bring to marvelous light. Anytime we as a Christian heard the word “Kingdom” we need to look for the king; as Christian Christ is our King because He is the head of the church. The other kingdom the Bible was referring too is the kingdom of grace that is when we all are with God forever and ever.
In chapter 9, in Theological Turning point, the author was talking about eschatological controversy that is the Kingdom of God. It is true in the Old Testament, the Bible was taught about two kingdoms of God –one God would come as a King and would never die and the other one he would die for the sins of the world. The Jew had political problem at that time that they wanted the one God would come as King of Kings. Most of the Gospel, when they were talking about the kingdom of God, they were not talking about heaven. The book of Matthew was written for the Jew, it was a sin for them to mention the name of Yahweh instead Matthew put heaven. We need to be cautious, when the Bible refer to kingdom of God, the Bible talked about two kingdoms of God – one is the Kingdom of Glory and the other is the Kingdom of Grace. The Christian Church is the representation of the Kingdom of Grace as an embassy; the church was made to take people from darkness to bring to marvelous light. Anytime we as a Christian heard the word “Kingdom” we need to look for the king; as Christian Christ is our King because He is the head of the church. The other kingdom the Bible was referring too is the kingdom of glory that is when we all are with God forever and ever.
I want to comments on Montes suggestion of Romans. When the Bible said, people without law; basically, the Bible refers to 10 Commandments sometimes the Old Testament. There are a lot of sins who were not part of the 10 Commandments or Old Testament. God has been talking in different ways and different manners even without the Law a person could see there is a God. I agree with you in that assessment “No society can progress without law. There would be chaos and upheavals day after day; week after week and all the time.” Do we (Theologians students)think when we go to heaven there will be Law? That we will have free will! If that is true, how God knew that we will not sin again.
To be fully human means to be fully spiritual
In class the issue was raised that to be fully human means to be fully spiritual. I never thought of this concept before, but it makes perfect sense. Obviously God created man to be fully human or else God wouldn’t have created him. Man was made perfect and fully spiritual meaning that he was in perfect harmony with God. Then once man had fallen, not only did he descend spiritually but his humanity also descended and plummeted in an abysmal state. So now man is not only far from being fully spiritual but man is also sub-human.
Therefore the only way to become fully human is to become fully spiritual or to be in perfect union with God the way God originally created it. This can only be done when those who are under the blood stain banner of Jesus Christ are glorified.
This idea goes along with the view that Dr.Hanna presented about how human being can’t be human unless they are in healthy relationships to other. Just like the Father can’t be a Father without the Son and the Son can’t be the Son unless he had a Father. The same goes with a Husband and a Wife they cannot be husband and wife without relationship to each other. Therefore if we fail to make relationships and rub shoulders with others then we are denying our humanity. We were designed to be an community with each other and if we fail to do this then we are not only less loving but less then human.
Keenan
Christological Controversy
We have been discussing in class the fact that Christ was fully human and full divine and this doctrine is in fact comforting to me. I can see how the early church members and the Apostolic Fathers had to really come to a clear understanding of this point because it directly relates to Christ’s role as God (Trinity). With the various views of Christology that were presented in those early years, Docetism, Gnosticism, Ebionism, Monarchianism, etc., there needed to be some clear statement made that explained his humanistic qualities without denying his Godhood.
I say that the ultimate prevailing decision that Christ is fully human and fully God is comforting to me because I know that through that humanity God has experienced, in a way, the same pains and sufferings that we all go through in life. I know that God knows and understands all, but it is so much more personal to me to know that Christ experienced humanity too. True he was sinless and as we mentioned was perhaps even “more human”, but he also took upon himself our sins, my sins, and experienced loss, fatigue, betrayal, physical pain, and anguish of soul and even death. Because of his personal experience of these things I know that when I am praying for help through a difficult time, God understands in a very personal way what I am going through and that means a lot to me
Jacob
From this chapter on the Christological Controversy from Theological Turning Points I could see how the theme of God’s transcendence and how we understand God’s transcendence is part of the development of Christian doctrines. The Bible tells us that the Lord changes not (Mal. 3:6). But what does that mean? How does God change not? Because we believe Jesus to be Lord and yet he was born, grew, died and resurrected. He has gone from before the incarnation to be incarnated to now having a body that will last for all eternity. And yet Hebrews 13:8 tells us that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever.” I liked the discussion in class that pointed out that the context in Malachi is God’s mercy. So I wonder if God’s transcendence refers only to his Character. How we understand God’s transcendence is important because like Arius (p.31) it can lead some to deny the Divinity of Christ because he obviously does change physically. And though the Christian church has not said that God’s transcendence refers to his Character it seems that in the discussion of Christology they started to move that direction: Athanasius (p.32) says that “the incarnation of Jesus did not alter the transcendent status of Christ… [He] still exercises sovereignty over the universe while in a human body.
One more thing I could not help to notice from the chapter on the Christological Controversy in Theological Turning Points was the similarity on what Theodore of Mopsuestia, from the Antiochene School, said and what Mrs. White said. On page 36 it is said that Theodore understood the human nature of Jesus as “a ‘garment’ in which Christ’s body is wrapped.” And on page 90 of Dr. Hanna’s book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Hanna quotes Mrs. White: “Christ had not exchanged His divinity for humanity; but He had clothed His divinity in humanity. He veiled His divinity with the garb of humanity, but he did not part with his divinity.” It took me some more studying of the quotes from Dr Hanna on pp.87-90 to realize that she also agrees with Athanasius from the Alexandria School. Athanasius said “He [Jesus] became human. He did not enter into a human being” p. 32. Mrs. White said “The eternal Word consented to be made flesh. God became man.” “Christ did not make believe take human nature; He did verily take it. He did in reality possess human nature… He is declared to be a man.” Finally, I understood that the Chalcedon council of 451 affirmed the two natures, divine and human, of Christ and his singleness of personhood; which seems to me the same that Mrs. White has done. One question that remains in my mind is: Does this mean that Mrs. White confirms the decision taken on the Chalcedon council in regard to Jesus nature?
Was Jesus Divine foreknowledge limited?
How does God know the future? Is it because God is timeless and is already in the future, present and past all at the same time? Or is it because God is temporal and has divine foreknowledge? I believe it is the latter. I believe that God is temporal and knows the future because he has divine foreknowledge. Now if you believe that Jesus is divine as well then that would mean that Jesus while on earth had divine foreknowledge. Now this poses some problems for me. If Jesus has divine knowledge then he knew where to be at the right time all the time. He knew where to position himself so that he could cross paths with those that needed healing. He knew that the woman at the well was going to be there at that specific time. Jesus knew the woman with the issue blood was going to touch him when she did. Jesus knew when he was going to be betrayed. Therefore Jesus would have known that he was going to die on the cross and be resurrected with no problems. However if that is the case then why is it that Jesus could not have seen beyond the cross? If he has divine foreknowledge then why did he have to pray to the Father to take this cup away from him? Why did the aguish of going to the cross make Jesus sweat drops of blood?
Therefore somehow some way Jesus divine foreknowledge had to be cut off temporarily or was it?
I do not claim to have the answer to this question with my feeble human mind, but I’m just posing the question that has to come up if Jesus is divine and has divine foreknowledge. Maybe you have the answer…
Keenan
Response to Max #5 paper
Max I agree that there is no scriptural evidence that John was actually in the water when Jesus was baptized. However I think that we must be careful and not take a dogmatic approach to this because there is no scriptural evidence that says John wasn’t in the water with Jesus. This is a subject that you brought up in another class and I do believe that it should be looked at some more.
Good post!
Keenan
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Chapter 2 - Reading the Book of Scripture
This chapter brings up the issue of Biblical authority. In it, Prof. Hanna asks why there are “so many disagreements concerning correct Christian faith”. (32) Which stirs me up to say, in order for the Scripture to be a final authority, it must have unity within itself. That is, the Bible cannot be divided; or else which of the parts would have greater authority? I have two young children. A common strategy my older son uses is to ask my wife and I both until he gets the answer he wants. We do so also with Scripture sometimes. If we do not like what the Old Testament says about God, we always have a court of appeals in the New Testament and vice versa. This is a very dangerous method of interpretation. As Bible students compare Scripture with Scripture, it must not be done in order to diminish the fact that circumstances alter cases, and that God's revelation is not always one size fits all. The whole Word of God should be brought to bear on a subject. If the majority of texts speak to one side of an issue, even so the minority should still be heard. And those of us with scholarly skills should not attempt to cover up the attempt to divide and conquer by appealing to the original languages or textual issues (unless it is warranted). Please do not pit the Old Testament against the New.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Chapter 6 - The Theme of the Bible is Jesus
Following up my previous comments on the essential unity of Scripture, it makes sense to take a look at what the Bible is unified on. Having been written by different people under different circumstances in different cultures and languages, there is a lot of variety represented within its pages. Notwithstanding, since it is all truth it bears a correspondence with reality and thus the creator of all things. As I was contemplating the theme of Jesus throughout Scripture, I realized that those who attempt to discount the prophetic witness of Christ in the Old Testament are actually attacking the gospel. The debate is not simply academic; it strikes to the heart of the character of God. Some religious speakers leave me with the impression that the God of the OT was vindictive and cruel, but Jesus finally was incarnated to make an appeasement. The same teachers contrast the brutality of the Israelite congregation with the alleged peacefulness of the Christian church. But this is fantasy. We find some of the most excellent stories of grace right in the OT: from Adam whose life was spared, to Isaac, to David, etc. And we also find in Christian history some of the most brutal tales of injustice.
Cosmic Christ: Reading the Book of Scripture
I found the question and subsequent answer on how the Bible relates to the knowledge of the cosmos to be very interesting. Yes, the Bible is not a textbook for everything in life. We can’t open a chapter that talks about heroin addiction, internet pornography, or the possibilities of nuclear war. These are modern problems and if we search the Bible to find those kinds of modern specifics of course we will be left wanting. But like the chapter says, the Bible provides the framework on which we can approach and problem that life sends at us. There are basic principles taught throughout its pages that can be applied to any situation. Perhaps even more importantly it can help us put into perspective extra-biblical knowledge, like is mentioned. New knowledge, understanding, technology, and research is being discovered in all fields of study as time goes on, and while the bibles origins date to times long past it can still be applied to modern knowledge. With the Bible as our guide and companion we can put modern knowledge into its proper God inspired place and understanding and then face any challenges that might come our way
Jacob
As I read the chapter on Ecclesiology, I noticed an interesting phenomenon. While McKim makes a point to discuss some of the Biblical ideas behind the concept of ecclesiology (as well as the others chapters of the book), I noticed that many of the ideas expressed from the church fathers did not seem to be Biblically supported. For example, a Donatist Bishop at one point says that there can be no baptism with the church. While I can understand why the church would want to say this, I struggled to be reminded of any sort of Biblical precedent for that statement.
The second thing that I noticed was that at one point the author (I believe) is expressing an idea that the church must be unified. McKim goes on to write that Augustine believed that the opposite of love was schism and that schism is sacrilege. Once again, it seems that this type of statement is not based on a biblical idea but rather on our own reasoned ruminations on the subject. While the Bible does not necessarily cover all issues, I believe that it covers all principles and so we should be searching for those principles in order to inform our worldview.
Jason
On page 32 of his book Dr. Hanna makes an interesting statement. He writes, “At the same time, I propose that Scripture also guides the Christian in matters of knowledge.” I find this to be an interesting statement because I believe it more clearly expresses an idea often held by those described as “conservative” Christians. As I implied, I believe that statement is not adequately expressed by this group. Instead of saying that the Scriptures guide them in matters of knowledge, they instead state that Scripture is the source of all knowledge. The logical end of this position is that if the Bible does not state it, then it cannot be agreed to by those who hold a Christian worldview.
Instead the focus should be on conforming our knowledge to the principles and the ideas found in Scripture. Therefore, if the information which other sources provide is compatible with the word of God, then we should not be against that knowledge simply because it did not come from the Bible or some other religious authority. On the other hand, if the Bible does not support that knowledge then it should be rejected. While the most applicable place where this can be found is in the world of science, I think it also applies to philosophy, politics, and even religion itself.
Brandon Smith
September Assignment #1
Understanding the Christian World
Chapter 6 – The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
The Divine and Human Natures of Christ
Up until about two weeks ago, I cant say that I’ve ever really sat down and considered the AWESOME power in the statement that Jesus is both FULLY God and FULLY human at the same time!! The bible states that “God was manifest in the Flesh” in 1st Timothy 6:15 and when one truly reflects on this great truth, you cant help but get excited about the deep wisdom, creativity and love of God.
Now I understand that many are quite ambivalent about Jesus carrying a Human and Divine nature and their thoughts, questions and perspectives are completely valid due to the great complexity of God’s ways of doing things. However, I believe that as wide and as deep as this issue is concerning Christ’s dual natures, there comes a breaking point in all human analysis, that challenges the human mind to either BELIEVE Jesus is what the bible says he is or reject all that is revealed about him. In respect to Dr. Hanna and his aggressive desire to inspire God’s disciples to think long and hard about the important elements of life they confess as their own, I personally believe that Faith isn’t FULLY explaining everything to the point where one is all knowing in one area, rather it is embracing the substance of things hoped for and not seen simply because of a deep abiding trust in the God who has clearly revealed himself over and over and over in the personal life.. Without this encounter, the circles of explanation and interpretation will continue to spin round and round until human life is no more..
Brandon Smith
September Assignment #2
Understanding the Christian World
Class Lecture
Christ’s decision to “Do Right”
A couple of weeks ago, we discussed the dual nature of Christ in class and for this particular blogspot entry, I want to just give a couple of reactions to some of the rich dialogue we had.
When I think about Jesus living in the flesh for 33 years without sinning, I cant help but marvel at how strong his connection was with the Father in heaven. I guess this concept means a lot to me right now because as a sincere son seeking to enjoy mr relationship with the creator, I candidly have to say that sometimes I get a little frustrated in trying to stay under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I mean there are times when I KNOW I shouldn’t be making a decision to fall into sin yet even despite my BEST effort, I end up in sin only to painfully look back in the rear view mirror and wonder “what will it take to truly overcome”…
My question to you guys tonight as colleges is… as you guys struggle with your most challenging sins, what strategies have you used that keep a strong communion with God and foster a more dependent relationship with him. There are many that I use myself but I’m totally open to the victorious experiences of others to assist me in my day to day walk with Christ.
Cosmic Christ: The Theme of the Bible is Jesus
In this part of Dr. Hanna’s book I was impressed with the section on how Jesus is the restorer of full human personhood. I know we talked about this in class a bit but it really struck me this time when reading it. Sin is not a part of the full human personhood; God did not create fallen-man. Yet we cannot overcome this part of our now fallen nature without Jesus. He also mentions how because or Christ we can eventually partake of the divinity of God. As we turn to him and let ourselves be filled with the Holy Spirit we can become more like our full human potential.
I can’t help but look at Christ’s life as portrayed in the New Testament and the example he lived and wonder if that is not how a person in full personhood should behave. I think it is and realize that this is only possible by aligning oneself with the will of God. This, in turn, in only possible by turning to Christ and letting him fill our every day lives. Then we can start to be more “fully human.”
Jacob
Soteriological Controversy
I thought it interesting that our book points out that the development of the doctrine of salvation took several centuries and is still going through development today (page 79). I guess this stems from what one means by “salvation.” The fact that our book points out seven different meanings for “salvation,” all founded in the biblical text, goes to show why a full and complete understanding of what this really means is ongoing. But no matter what definition is attached to the word “salvation,” it is something that we, human beings, need and in every form. Salvation in every respect is something that we cannot achieve on our own; every form of real salvation comes about because of Jesus Christ. We would do well to remember that fact whether we are seeking freedom, peace with God, reconciliation, forgiveness from sin, justification, and/or redemption. Christ is the key and we need to turn to him for any and all of these and we need to be able and willing to help others to know where to turn in order to receive the same.
I found a very interesting concept in the chapter on soteriology in McKim’s book. In the early church there were many ways of viewing salvation that were proposed by different church fathers. What was interesting to me about this fact was that all of the ways of looking at salvation that McKim expressed all had validity to them. Many of the apostolic fathers saw salvation as illumination – the knowledge of what Christ gave to us in His time on Earth. I think this definitely has elements of truth in it. Irenaeus saw salvation as restoration. Salvation certainly has an element of restoring us to a right relationship with God. Tertullian saw it as satisfaction – fulfilling a debt that had been created by our sin. That seems to have elements of truth in it as well. Origen saw salvation as victory, and Christ’s death, which allows for salvation is certainly a victory over the power of the devil. Athansius and the Eastern theologians saw salvation as deification. Now that seems to be tenuous at first glance, until you realize that they are discussing the deification that will take place for all the saved at the end of time. Finally, Augustine looked at salvation as justification, which seems obvious to me as well. What I credit Augustine for is the fact even in his model of justification he attempted to meld many of the former models together under the umbrella of justification.
On page 71 of his book, Dr. Hanna quotes John 5: 39-40 where Christ says, “You search the Scriptures because you think in them you have eternal life. The Scriptures testify of me; and yet you would not come to Me for life. This verse has always given me some pause. I often wonder if we as Christians today are not making the same mistakes that the Pharisees made when Jesus made this statement. We too have Scriptures. Is it possible that we rely on the Scriptures too much? Are we not technically in the same position as the Pharisees of Jesus’ day? Are we not just as able to go to Jesus for life as well? While I am not trying to say that we should not consult the Scriptures at all, I think I am willing to say that the individual revelations of Christ in our individual lives should take a place that is above Scripture. I think some might say in response that we should use the Scriptures as a way of knowing what Christ is saying to us. But I am not sure if that is accurate either. Doesn’t the Bible itself have stories of requests from God that do not seem to be in line with what God has established in the Bible as rules to live by? For example, God tells Abraham to kill Isaac even though God says that murder is wrong. I don’t know the answer to this question, but I do believe that we probably need to focus more on our individual relationships with Christ.
After my presentation in class, you know that I have been interested in the topic of baptism. I figured I would post on chapter 7 (Sacramental Controversy) from McKim. Suddenly I have some things to say on this issue. I have posited the thesis that differences in baptismal practice are not primarily rooted in culture, tradition, or convenience but rather in beliefs. Beliefs say what are the parameters in which the other secondary influences of culture, etc. effect the practice. For example, we believe from Romans 6 that baptism represents the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. But is the act enough to provide salvation; does it literally eliminate sin? The book raises questions about infant baptism or put another way, unduly deferring baptism. Perhaps the key to understanding baptism is as an entrance to the Christian community. Or as a sealing in recognition of God's elect (before the foundation of the world - whatever we mean by that). Or an outward means of communicating an inward grace. The beliefs are diverse. It is good that as Adventists we allow for profession of faith, open communion, and child dedication. It is also good that we are willing to struggle a little to determine where the boundaries are if we want membership to be on a truly spiritual basis.
I've been thinking about chapter 3 of the Cosmic Christ of Scripture. Dr. Hanna explains that Christ, Scripture and the cosmos all have primacy in a certain sphere. There is one supreme written revelation of what is true. There is another supreme being that is the center of all theology. And there is one reality that serves as the backdrop for everything that truly exists. Scripture is the supreme written word that points to Jesus. The Bible also tells us whether our perceptions of nature are rooted in the truth. Christ is unique as the express image of the invisible God. If you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father. And the cosmos is unique as the context for divine revelation. In a way it functions as a medium in which God communicates with man. The primacies are different: epistemological, ontological, and contextual; even so, it reveals some limitations to the sola scriptura principle in areas other than epistemology. We cannot use the Bible as a divinity in and of itself. Nor does it define our existence. So there is unity in diversity. We have the Scriptures. We have Jesus Christ. And we have the immeasurable cosmos to explore throughout the ages of the ages.
The invisible and visible Church
Jesus says in John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
What is the visible church? I think the visible church isn’t just limited to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. I believe the visible church is all who claim to be Christian. No matter which denomination you are in as long as that denomination proclaims Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. That denomination could be Catholic or one that believes in handling and being bitten by snakes. Truly only God can judge how much light that individual is living up to. Therefore it doesn’t matter what denomination that person is in as long as their faithful.
The invisible church is all those that are living up to the amount of light that has been giving to them. It doesn’t matter if that person is in a Christian denomination or not. I believe that if a person is a Muslim or Hindu or whatever else and that is all that they know then he or she is in the invisible Church. At the End of the day the individual that is faithful to the Light given them is in God’s invisible church.
Keenan
Mission Minded Church
Dr Hanna said in class on 10/27/09 that people who join the church need to understand that they’re signing up for a mission. Today the church isn’t mission minded. The church especially in the North American Division is truly in its Laodicean slumber. As a church we claim that we are protestant but in practice we are Catholic. Our members look to the Pastor to do everything. In theory they want the Pastor to do Evangelism, visit the people and just babysit the members. This way of thinking has become detrimental to our church. It has become detrimental because if something were to happen to that Pastor then it seems as if the Church cannot function. I think that our members fall to this abysmal state of mind because they haven’t been trained, equip and empowered to be mission minded. Our members have become spectators. In a consumer age we have a consumer church. A church that doesn’t want anything to do with mission but rather consume then produce.
Remedy
I believe the only true remedy that will awaken our church out of our Laodicean slumber is persecution. I think it will take persecution to awaken us as church to become mission minded. Then the people that are just playing Church will leave and the ones that lay dormant will awaken and to awaken others.
Keenan
Theological Turning Points Today
For the last of these blog entries for the semester I felt it fitting to comment a bit on along the lines of the last chapter in McKim’s book. Although we didn’t get to all of them in class, the book covers nine major turning points in the history of Christian thought yet he only goes as far as the Reformation on an on these points. This last chapter very briefly looks at some more current issues. Just for your own thinking I would say, what other major turning points in Christian thought do we consider to have taken place since the time of the Reformation? What chapter(s) could we add to this book and what additions could we add to how these nine main points have progressed since the time of the Reformation? I found this kind of reflection to be fun and interesting. One more theoretical question, do you see any major theological turning points in Christianities’ near/immediate future and if so what are they? How about specifically in the future of the Seventh-day Adventist Church? I think these questions would have made for a fun class discussion.
Jacob Moody
Cosmic Christ: A Wholistic Model
Dr. Hanna makes a comment in a footnote in page129 that really rings true to me and helps to support his “wheel model.” He says, “Christ as the grand central theme of Scripture permits a proper biblical emphasis on the dub-themes of scripture. Each theme of scripture must be given its rightful place in relation to Christ.” He goes on to then show that the cosmos can be related/connected to scripture and then that all scripture is centered around and points to Christ. So in t very real sense we should be able to see God all around us. When we look at the world we live in, even in today’s modern and crazy world we can find connections to Christ all around us. Our study of Scripture will help us to make these connections. In turn as we study Scripture we should be able to see how it is relating to Christ in at any given point. So ask yourself this the next time you are reading a favorite passage form the Old Testament, or looking closer at Paul’s letters. Even if Christ Himself is not mentioned we can find how it relates to Him and His teachings.
Jacob Moody
As I wrestle with the issue of the state of the dead for my paper I keep being sent back to two chapters in Theological Turning Point: Chapter 4 (The Anthropological Controversy) and Chapter 5 (The Soteriological Controversy). The inter-connection of these two chapters is very clear but something has always seemed to be missing. After going over the areas that I have underlined in chapter 4, for the 3rd time, it just done on me that in the 5th century when the controversy over the nature of man took place, the theologians back then only dealt with one part of the issue. I find it interesting that when the author gives the biblical basis about the nature of humanity he emphasizes how the Old Testament view “is a basic wholeness of the person rather than a duality or plurality of parts (p.62).” And in the New Testament, and especially in the writing of Paul, we also see the same Old Testament “perspective that unites the constituent parts of a person… body and soul do not indicate individual and exclusive entities but are rather terms applied to the whole personality (p.63).” But in the anthropological controversy in the 5Th century theologians assumed a duality – “humans are perceived as dichotomous, composed of body and soul (p.65).” And it is from this point of view (that a human being is a dichotomous being) that the controversy is argued. The theologian try to understand what does it mean to be created in God’s image, and what impact does sin had in the individual nature, in particular the ability to decide to sin or not to sin – Does man have a free will and what does that mean? The issue of duality vs. monism was never argued nor a final position decided by the Christian church.
Roberto
Theological Turning Points
Chapter 9 - Eschatological Controversy
I was excited by page 160 which revealed that Luther had a strong concern that the world would end before the Scriptures were translated into German. This is in contrast to many of his time such as Calvin who would rather not talk about the millennium in literal terms, at least as they understood it to be a time of Christ's reign on a sinful earth. In my recent paper, I made an argument that practice is caused by belief so there may be some general implications here. First, a belief in the soon coming of the literal kingdom of God can compel people to do some very rebellious things with the expectation that the consequences are not so important in light of eternity. Second, those who do not believe in a literal coming kingdom may regard those who do as unenlightened, ignorant, or simply over-optimistic. The distinct impression I get from some writings is that people simply do not think that God cares about human history enough to intervene. Colossians 3:2 urges us to set our minds on things that are above, not on things on the earth. In this way teachings like the second coming are part of unique Adventist spirituality. The expectation of the coming kingdom transforms our lives.
Theological Turning Points
Chapter 5 - Soteriological Controversy
To comment on page 83 and following, I think there has been an overreaction to the concept of salvation as deification; we're leaning now to the other extreme in our tendencies of interpretation. Many people desire to preserve the eternal humility of human beings for sin at the expense of many clear passages that indicate our glorification. This is a mistake. It's one thing to correct and say no, we're not going to become gods. But it's another thing to say, well Jesus promised those who overcome will sit with him on his throne (Rev. 3:21) BUT that throne is going to be carted to some private room or something so that nobody gets any honor or anything for being there with Jesus. In fact, it is an honor to sit on the throne with Jesus. It's an honor for the 144,000 to sing a song that no one else can sing except those who were redeemed from the earth (Rev. 14:3). It's an honor to sit in judgment over angels (1 Corinthians 6:3). So those who over-correct from the teaching of salvation as deification go too far. It's better to acknowledge plainly that when Jesus took on humanity, he lifted the race higher than it was at creation. Now we are a spectacle to the universe to behold the great love of God (1 Corinthians 4:9).
As I continue to try to understand how a person’s view of human nature affects his view of salvation, I noticed that Origen is a good example. Some scholars believe that Origin had a Universalist view for the fate of those that die – so that everybody will make it to heave. I wonder how we classify Origin as so. In regard human nature we are told that he was heavily influenced by Neo-Platonism, so he believe that God had created the souls and when a soul sin it took on flesh as a human being (p.67) (a dualistic view). Then the souls that repent and follow God become His angels and those that do not accept Christ’s merits become angels of the devil (p.68). In regard salvation, Origen uses the theme of ransom to explain his view. Christ gives his soul to the devil in exchange for all the other souls, but neither Satan nor death can hold the soul of Christ because it is too good. It seems that at the end every soul is rescued and only Satan and death are left to be destroyed. I find it interesting that while human the souls had a free will and could choose to become angels of God or angels of the devil. But once Christ overcame every soul that became an angel of the devil is rescued and perhaps is turned into an angel of God. There is no choice for the fallen angels. They too will be rescued. Perhaps, there is an assumption that they remain evil angels against their will.
Roberto
On the last page of Hanna’s book, Hanna cites George Reid who issues a double challenge to Adventists. The first challenge is that we have to continue to do theology in light of God as the center of universe and divine revelation as a monitor for all knowledge. The second challenge is to develop approaches that are responsive to cultural values including science. This is such an interesting concept. I find that many Christians are resistant to this type of challenge. I have a hard time understanding why. I think some people are just afraid that if they open themselves up to this type of challenge that they will be swept away into worldliness. However, I think it is Justas damaging to do some of the things that we do now, which is related to the first challenge. We often, in my opinion, do not create theology with God as the center and revelation as the monitor. Too often we allow culture to dictate what we believe and then say that our beliefs are based on the Word of God. While the word, one of God’s divine revelations gives us principles by which to live, it does not cover every conceivable circumstance. We must be willing to realize this and give people the freedom to make choices based off of the divine revelation revealed to them.
I was incredibly struck by McKim’s last chapter, which summarized where some of the historical theological issues of the church are today. This reminded me of a very important idea which we have touched on a couple of times throughout this course. In this course we have talked about the biblical concept of the path of just shining brighter and brighter until the perfect day and how that relates to the increase in knowledge. The SDA church promotes this idea with the concept of present truth. However, McKim makes the point that you can’t increase in knowledge if you are unwilling to move off of the theological position you currently hold. Every increase in knowledge that helped us better understand God, or Christology, or anthropology came because someone was willing to disagree with what was widely believed at the time. Because we do not fully understand everything, it means that in order for the Christian worldview to be perfected, we will have to be willing to move from the theological positions we now hold. I have no idea what we do not understand as well as we should, or where we can make progress, but I am deeply concerned that our religion will become stagnant if we continue to maintain the status quo and do not seek to come to a greater knowledge of who God is and what he requires of us.
Soteriology
How are we saved? One of the major turning points in history of Christian Theology is Soteriology. The controversy between Pelagius and Augustine prove to identify some of the problems that the 5th century church had with humanity and the power of sin. Once the debate over humanity and the power of sin was somewhat solved, next was to understand the Doctrine of Salvation. Pelagius and Augustine viewed sin as something that can be overcome and a relationship with Jesus restored. The doctrine of atonement and salvation go hand and hand with the doctrine of salvation. Still there was no clear doctrine on salvation until Martin Luther. I think Martin Luther made one of the most major contributions to the doctrine of Salvation. Martin Luther clearly shed the most light on the doctrine of salvation. Martin Luther challenged the Church with Justification by faith as a means of salvation. The Church at that time taught that Christ didn’t complete the work of salvation. The Church believed in a sense that Christ did 99% of the work while man is left to do 1% of the work when it comes to salvation. This is what Martin Luther spoke out against and made the biggest contributions to as far Soteriology.
Keenan
Soteriology
How are we saved? One of the major turning points in history of Christian Theology is Soteriology. The controversy between Pelagius and Augustine prove to identify some of the problems that the 5th century church had with humanity and the power of sin. Once the debate over humanity and the power of sin was somewhat solved, next was to understand the Doctrine of Salvation. Pelagius and Augustine viewed sin as something that can be overcome and a relationship with Jesus restored. The doctrine of atonement and salvation go hand and hand with the doctrine of salvation. Still there was no clear doctrine on salvation until Martin Luther. I think Martin Luther made one of the most major contributions to the doctrine of Salvation. Martin Luther clearly shed the most light on the doctrine of salvation. Martin Luther challenged the Church with Justification by faith as a means of salvation. The Church at that time taught that Christ didn’t complete the work of salvation. The Church believed in a sense that Christ did 99% of the work while man is left to do 1% of the work when it comes to salvation. This is what Martin Luther spoke out against and made the biggest contributions to as far Soteriology.
Keenan Tyler
One fold
John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
I agree with Dr Hanna’s notion that God has sheep in the church and in the world. I believe that God does have people that will be saved and in heaven that never stepped foot into any Christian Church. James 4:17 says:
“Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”
Therefore to all those who live up to the light that has been given them they will be saved. This should keep Christians in all denominations humble. This should point out to all Christians that there are people in other denominations that will be in heaven. There are sheep in all Christian denominations. There will be people that proclaimed to be Christians who have never keep a Sabbath day Holy or who have ever heard of an investigative judgment. There are also sheep that God has that aren’t a part of any Church. These sheep may not be a part of any Church but they are staying faithful to what they know. If they never heard the gospel of Jesus Christ but all they know is to do good then that as what they will be held accountable for.
Christians in all denominations should remain humble because Jesus said that he has other sheep that are not of this fold. This should also drive the Christian to ever evaluate himself to see if he is in right relationship with God.
Keenan
On the 1st day of September, Dr.Hanna mentioned the doctrinal development."The church has progressed and developed in the understanding of truth".It was quite awakening to learn that not just the scholars, but "even" the church has developed in the understanding of truth. It means that the doctrines that Seventh-day Adventist church has today are the production of such progress. And also there was an order in the development of the doctrines:The doctrine was developed from the OT to the NT. God has been revealing Himself in the history over time: The OT believers didn't believe that Jesus was God, Messiah and the Comforter and they had to expand the concept of God or reject Christ.
Sometimes I think to myself:'What kind of life with what kind of concept about God would I have lived as a Christian if I had been born in the Middle Ages?' and I'm thankful to God that I'm living in this modern times because I could enjoy the brighter light of knowing God than before in the history.
Prov. 4:18
The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining ever brighter till the full light of day.
-Communication of the attributes
I think the divinity and the humanity of Christ is the key factor in understanding in the image of Christ and in growing to it too. I don't believe that we can fully understand both nature that God has with my human perspective but at least I agree with the notion that Dr. Hanna said in class even though I don't think I can experience both experiences in the real life: everything divine is experienced by humanity and everything human is experienced by divinity.
And the concept about the communication of the divinity and humanity was quite myterious: Divine God is human and human God is divine and yet divinity doesn't become humanity and the humanity doesn't become divinity.What the Father does, the Son does and what the Son does, the Holy Spirit does.
As a human being, we could experience divinity through humanity but we couldn't experience humanity through divinity because we're not divine.
However, I think we need to know and remeber that we're the partakers of the Holy Spirit ever since we're called by God and are in the process of being restored because God's Spirit which is the power of redemption has been working in us powerfully.
We're God's descendant and still experience Him because God communicates with us through His Spirit and we grow into the image of Christ. I'm thankful that God is a God of communication with His full divinity and humanity.
-4 levels of human worldview by Helminiak(The best way of realizing reality to Christinas)
Learning this in class was a surprising blessing to me because I could interpret and understand the process of struggling of a view of life since teenaged years learning this leves of worldview. Through my own experience, I know how important to have the right worldview which becomes the base of the healthy perspective of life.
The 1st level is "Positivist level" which asks "What is the fact?"
The 2nd level is "Philosophical level" and it asks what the meaning and value of the fact.
The 3rd level is "Theistic level" which seeks to find the ultimate truth which is God.
Lastly, the 4th level is about the communication between God and man which is theo-poetic.
This also shows that the order of the development of the worldview. The development of the worldview starts with seeking for facts. If we can't discover facts, we can't ask the meaning and the value to ourselves. Through the process of asking the philosophical questions, we can meet the ultimate truth which is ultimate reality, God. But we're not supposed to stop there. We need to go to the level where we can communicate with God and we can build up the right worldview through growing in the knowledge of knowing God more and more.
So, through the experience, we can become a partakers in the divine nature and can develop the Christian worldview.
What I've learned from these levels of human worldview is that if we fail in building up the healthy worldview, our life can go astray and can be a sacrifice of the wrong worldview. God wants us to build up the healthy Christian worldview and Christian identity so we can live our life according to His good will for us and in the prosecc we would be able to be tranformed into the image of Christ.
4th Comment on Chapter 4: Increasing Secular and Spiritual Knowledge
Q.Do we need to increase "secular" knowledge?
Ellen White suggests that we should go to and fro to increase spiritual and "secular" knowledge.
Unfortunately many Christians shirk their responsibility to increase spiritual knowledge.
I agree with the responsibility that we have to increase knowledge.
However, it's surprising to read that we're supposed to increase even the "secular" knowledge not just the spiritual knowledge.
Dr.Hanna wrote that "well-organized work must be donein the church, that its members may understand the manner in which thay may impart light to others, and thus strengthen their own faith and increase their knowledge." White refers to Christ and Christian experience as channels of revelation.
The students should improve every moment to increase their knowledge. Why? It's because they may put it to practical use as laborers together with God for the help and blessing of their fellow men.
So I got to know why we need to know secular knowledge. We can't live our life away from the world but have to stay in this world. However, we aren't supposed to belong to this world because we're of Go, not of this world.
we should use every single day to increase logical, experimental, temporal and spiritual knowledge.
God desires His workers to gain daily a better understanding of how to reason "logically" from cause to effect, arriving at wise, safe conclusions.
There is need of knowledge that is the fruit of experience. "We should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual thngs."
What a great duty it is as a Christian!!!
But accepting any doctrine or percept, we should demand a plain 'Thus saus the Lord' in its support.
Speaking of which, Christians have to know both sides of reality: spiritual and secular.That's why Christians who are born of the Holy Spirit become the head whereever they are.
Thank God for the knowledge that He revealed to us through the Scripture, Christ and the nature.
Everything in this world is the revelation of God!
5th Comment on chapter 7 of "The cosmic Christ of Scripture"
-Christ centered connection
The book writes that
"For Ellen White, the Christ centered connections of divine and human persons involve three overlapping themes of Scripture."
1. God has created humanity in the image of divinity.
2. The corporate nature of humanity is indicated in the identification of all humanity with the first man-Adam, and with Christ-the last Adam.
3. Jesus is the Restorer of full human personhood: Since human persons exist in bodily form, Jesus restores human personhood in His human body and in the Church which is His spiritual body.Jesus restores human personhood by making it possible for human persons to become partakers of divine nature through the divine-human personhood of Christ. The proper destiny of humanity is this unity with divinity.
Reading what Dr.Hanna wrote in this chapter about what Ellen White had thought of the connection between Jesusd humanity and His divinity, I had some time to ponder on the importance of humanity and on how seriously God takes the humanity. I think it's really crucial to realize how God deals with the humanity in Jesus because we were created in the image of God and Jesus was too. Moreover, Jesus is our model of how we have to live an earthly life. God put social nature in humans like God,Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one in unity and they coorperate in the relationship with one another. We are supposed to know that Jesus who came down to earth bore out sin and the price was paid. Thirdly, we need to know that we are the partakers of divine nature and can be restored to our full potential as persons.
Jesus came to this world as a full human and lived as a full human and worked for the full redemption for the mankind.
So there's a hope for us as partakers of divinity that we can live like Jesus and be a channel for Jesus' restoring work for the mankind.
Praise the Lord because Jesus took the full humanity even though He is God.
-6th Comment on "the mind of Christ" of Chapter 9
Q. What does the Bible say about the Mind of Christ?
6 Greek words from the Pauline epistles are translated as "mind".
5 factors common to all human beings are soul(psuche), opinion(gnome), throughts(noema), dispositions(phronema), and intellect(dianoia). And the 6th one is word(nous) which is the seat of understanding and conviction and the content of our minds.
Dr.Hanna wrote that a "mind-set" or "worldview" will result from God's gifts of wisdom and spiritual perception, or the lack of these. Fortunately, worldview may be changed and renewed:we can be transformed by the radical metamorphosis(anakainoo) of your mind (or worldview)".
It's crucially significant matter that what kind of worldview we have because through the worldview we have, everything will be evaluated and judged. Therefore we need to have the mindset(worldview) of Christ so we could live our earthly life like Jesus did and could be more like Him. And the knowledge of gospel which is the Word of wisdom, not the natural knowledge or false science, will make us live a spiritual life.
It's a great discovery for me that I haven't ever thought that the "mind of Christ" is the perfect worldview!
Yes, Jesus' mind is the best worldview!
Post a Comment