Showing posts with label christology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label christology. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Kevin Giles vs. Fred Sanders on Eternal Subordination








The ff. are the 7 points (in his own words) that Kevin Giles made for rejecting any appeal to the immanent Trinity as the basis for either complementarianism or egalitarianism:

1.) The idea that the trinity prescribes human relations on earth is a very modern idea without historical precedence.

2.) The idea that the divine life in heaven prescribes human life and relations on earth is implausible. Where, we must ask, does God's perfect threefold relationship in heaven prescribe fallen human relations on earth? Nowhere in Scripture are we told to imitate divine, heavenly relations on earth. There is no biblical warrant for this idea whatsoever. Imitate Jesus? Yes. Imitate God's threefold relations in heaven? No.

3.) Specifically in regard to the man-woman relationship, to argue that the threefold divine relations in heaven prescribe the twofold man-woman relationship on earth, I think, is illogical.

4.) 1 Cor. 11:3 offers no convincing basis for this appeal to the Trinity.

5.) The idea of the Trinity speaks of the Father ruling over the Son is a denial of the full divinity of the Son and the unqualified lordship of Christ.

6.) To argue that the Son's eternal and necessary functional subordination does not imply ontological subordination is unconvincing.

7.) The idea of the Son as eternally subordinated to the Father is rejected by most contemporary Trinitarian scholars.


Friday, April 4, 2014

Christology, Goodwin, Jones, and Sheen



Pastor Mark Jones' recent book, Antinomiansim, has made the rounds and it seems everybody has given it a high-five, and deservedly so. However, if there's just one thing about that book, and about everything from Pastor Jones that I've read and heard, that has had the most significant impact on me, I would say that that is his emphasis on Christology. In fact, a sound and robust Christology is the remedy that he proposes for antinomianism in the aforementioned book. Incidentally, he has this little book on Christology that I found enjoyable.

Pastor Jones is not shy about proclaiming to whom he owes the most for his love and knowledge of Christology.

While John Owen is certainly up there, as evidenced by this article and his having co-edited this book with Kelly Kapic (I bought it as a Christmas gift to myself), it is Thomas Goodwin who was influential enough to have prompted him to have the esteemed Puritan theologian as the subject matter of his doctoral dissertation (in a sermon of his, Pastor Jones remarked that his choice of Goodwin and Christology was brought on by the desire to be of more pastoral service to his flock, as opposed to topics that would not have true benefit to the church).

By a stroke of amiable providence, that document is available online:





Lest you think that I am wantonly sharing this without permission:



If Pastor Jones' Christology was shaped by Thomas Goodwin, it must follow that it would be a very good idea to read on the man himself. So I got myself the following and read:


- A Habitual Sight of Him: The Christ-Centered Piety of Thomas Goodwin (edited by Joel Beeke and Mark Jones)

- Christ Set Forth (Goodwin)

- The Heart of Christ in Heaven Towards Sinners on Earth (Goodwin) *This was the most influential book, according to Pastor Jones

- The Trial of a Christian's Growth (Goodwin)


I encourage you to get on Goodwin yourself. Even Charlie Sheen agrees:



Thursday, January 23, 2014

Trueman on Warfield on Christology



Evangelical Library (London) Lecture, 4 June 2001
An address on "The Glory Of Christ: B. B. Warfield on Jesus of Nazareth" given by Dr. Carl R Trueman


When B.B. Warfield died eighty years ago, in 1921, J Gresham Machen, his Princeton colleague, commented that old Princeton had indeed passed away with him. It is arguable that this was not much of an exaggeration, such was the stature of a man whose scholarship had been recognized in the award of an honorary degree from the University of Utrecht, who had been on personal terms with such luminaries as Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck, and whose writings, at both popular and academic levels, had influenced a generation of Christians in the church and in the academy. Yet, it is true to say that Warfield is little known today outside of the narrow confines of the evangelical world, that his piety is appreciated far more than his scholarship is understood, and that his wide-ranging theological contributions are not appreciated even by those for whom he symbolizes theological orthodoxy. Indeed, when we ask the question, For what is Warfield known today? we are likely to elicit responses which focus on his articulation of biblical inspiration and authority, his arguments for the cessation of the supernatural gifts of the Spirit, or his cautious arguments in favour of theistic evolution. Yet, as even a glance at the ten volume selection of his writings which were published by Oxford University Press in the early part of the twentieth century reveals, his range was much broader than these three narrow foci would suggest. [1]

For example, he also wrote on church history, producing essays on Tertullian, Augustine, and Calvin which still have merit today. He also engaged in extended study and refutation of perfectionism, providing the church with one of the most comprehensive historical and theological analyses of holiness teaching ever produced. In addition, he also found time to write reviews on many of the significant theological books of his time, continental as well as Anglo-American, revealing not only extensive linguistic competence but also a thorough and accurate understanding of the liberal positions which he rejected. Indeed, it is, I suspect, true to say that Warfield read his liberal opponents with more care, courtesy, and all-round theological learning than liberals have, over the years, applied to his own work. To reduce Warfield’s significance to a few doctrinal topics is thus to miss the real greatness of the man whose life was driven far more by a desire to restate the classic Reformed faith in an articulate and intelligent manner than simply to focus on one or two controversial points. [2] Indeed, his greatness is captured neatly in a recent comment from the pen of Mark Noll and David Livingstone:

Even in the long line of outstanding conservative theologians from Old Princeton that stretched from Archibald Alexander…to J Gresham Machen…Warfield stands out. In that distinguished company, he was the most widely read, had the greatest skill in European languages, displayed the most patience in unpacking arguments, and wrote clearly on the widest range of subjects. [3]

Today, therefore, I want to break with the traditional canon of evangelical topics upon which Warfield is consulted and look instead at a handful of writings from his pen devoted to Christology, the person and work of Jesus Christ. In the words of John Murray, ‘There is no subject on which Warfield’s master mind showed its depth and comprehension better than on that of the person and work of Christ.’ [4] And, we might ourselves add, there is no subject which stands more central to Christian orthodoxy than Christology. All great theologians have wrestled with the person and work of Christ, and the greatest theologians are those who have offered the most penetrating insights into precisely this area of doctrine. Thus, if we are to appreciate Warfield’s contribution to the Christian church in all its fulness, we need to develop some comprehension of his work on Christ.

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

The Condecency of Redemption



You may hear people, especially those of the Calvinistic bent, making the following comment in an effort to uphold the sovereignty of God in the administration of the state of affairs: "God would've been perfectly just in condemning every single human being to hell."

While the statement is not theologically aberrant per se, it, however, does not fully encapsulate the telos behind God's "ad extra" acts, namely, His glory. If God did consign every human being to destruction, in a necessary turn of events, the whole earthly created order would've had to be destroyed as well. Why so? Because if there was no human being left in the world, there would be no agent for the redounding of glory unto God through the created objects of the world. A majestic Siberian Tiger does not give God the glory that He desires without an image-bearer, in holiness and righteousness, to ascribe the excellencies of that animal to its Creator.

Hence, John Owen, states [all quotes henceforth from Christologia (Kindle version)]:

"Three things God designed in this communication of his image unto our nature, which were his principal ends in the creation of all things here below; and therefore was divine wisdom more eminently exerted therein than in all the other works of this inferior creation.
Related Posts with Thumbnails