The Feminization of Christ in the American Religion

Part II – The Two Natures of Christ

[Response to A Sentimental Journey - White Horse Inn broadcast the week of January the 15th, since I am trying to keep my post to about 500 words this response will be in more than one entry.]

“And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52 – ESV)

“Nathanael said to him, ‘How do you know me?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.’” (John 1:48 – ESV)

Hypostatic Union is the theological term of the concept that I presented in my last post. What I like to do in this post is to examine the relationship of the two natures of Christ by looking at selected text in the Gospels accounts of his life and ministry.

It is an amazing concept when we stopped to think about the two natures of Christ. For example, in Luke 2:40 we read the following: “And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom. And the favor of God was upon him” (ESV). When we think of Jesus a child we should also think (in some respect but not exclusively) of a child that was no different than any other child (except sin!). It is an awesome realization to think about this child (who is God incarnate) as being totally dependant on the nurturing of Mary and Joseph. As a child growing up his basic needs of food, shelter, clothing, education, and nurturing environment had to be provided for by his family. He was divine but he humbled himself as a child that had to be cared for while he growing up to become a man.

I think that Jesus was very much like other typical children growing up (except sin!). He had to learn to how crawl, to walk, to be toilet trained, and learn to talk. Just like all of us when we were a child. As stated in the scripture, Jesus “grew and became strong.” What a thought! Jesus grew, matured, and experienced all of the experiences of growing up just as we have experienced (without committing sin!). To think that even Jesus had to go through puberty (more on that later)! As he matured he “increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52 – ESV)

Since my Sunday school days as a boy I already had a basic understanding of the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union even if I didn’t know the technical term for this doctrine. As I got older I began to read the Gospel text for myself and some of the accounts seem to put holes in the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. For example (there are numerous examples I could use but because space I will focus on a couple), in John 1:48 there is this interesting exchange between Jesus and Nathanael, “how do you know me?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you’” (ESV). No problem here because if Jesus is truly God in human flesh I would expect him to demonstrate omniscience. Another example would be Matthew 24:34 which read: “Jesus said to him, ‘Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.’” (ESV) This is another incident of omniscience with some omnipotence. Again, I would expect that from a man who claimed to be divine. I am cool with that!

However, I would then read text in the Gospels where Jesus was asks about the day of his return and he would said, “I don’t know” (Matthew 24:36). I scratched my head. That doesn’t make sense! I read in Mark 5:30 where it says, “And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone out from him, immediately turned about in the crowd and said, ‘Who touched my garments’” (ESV)? Whoa? How can he not know? My doctrinal understanding of Jesus was beginning to become weak in its foundation. I asked myself this question, “How is it that Christ on one hand is omniscience and the other hand is not?”

I struggled this because it seems that these verses are illustrating contradictions in scripture, and this is a serious violation of Systematic Theology. It was R.C. Sproul who was instrumental in helping me get a better understanding of the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. Sproul explained in one of his question and answer session during a conference that Jesus’ human nature did not know everything but his divine nature did. The example he gave was a rhetorical question that is often asked by critics, “Did Jesus knew that the world was round when he lived here on earth?” The answer given by R. C. was that Jesus’ human nature may not have known the shape of the world, but his divine nature did.

Why am I posting entries of this concept? Stay tune for my next post (Part III). I will be posting about the issue of Christ and his “maleness”. I wrote the first two parts of this post in the hopes that I will not be misunderstood with my next post, but I know there will be some who will misunderstand the points that I will be trying to make. Hope to get it posted soon!

Your Brother
Timotheus

PS – Click [HERE!] for a theological quiz to see if you are orthodox or a heretic? My source tells me that the quiz was created by Shane Rosenthal.

The Feminization of Christ in the American Religion

Part 1 – Christ the God/Man

[Response to A Sentimental Journey - White Horse Inn broadcast the week of January the 15th, since I am trying to keep my post to about 500 words this response will be in more than one entry.]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. (John 1: 1-5 ESV)

I remember as a boy my mother making me memorize the 23rd Psalms. My Sunday school teachers would have me memorize the books of the Bible, The 10 Commandments, and the Beatitudes. I memorized John 1:1-5 not because I was made to memorize it but because my mother memorized that particular passage of scripture. She didn’t make us memorize it, but she recited it often as she was driving or working around the house. This particular scripture passage had some special meaning for my mother. I wish I was able to ask her why she liked that particular passage. However, I am not able to ask her because my mother died shortly after I graduated from high school. My mother was a woman who never grew up in a strong Christian family. I don’t think her family had ever attended church when she was growing up. In fact, I don’t think she attended a church service until she married my dad. I find it amazing that this passage was so important to her that she memorized it. Today I know this scripture by heart not because she made us memorize it but because she memorized it.

This scripture passage proclaims one of the most profound concepts in theology. It is the concept what orthodox theologians call the God/man nature of Christ. It is a concept that I have been really thinking about during the past few months. The very idea that God would stoop down and become flesh is one of the most amazing biblical truths I have ever encountered in all my years of studying the Bible. It has radically changed the way I perceive Christ. In my weakness, my thinking tends to concentrate my understanding of Christ to his divine nature more than his humanity nature. This is very different than the way the Greeks of John’s day because they could not conceive of the idea of a deity becoming flesh. The early church had to deal with an early heresy called Docetism, which is the belief that Christ only appeared to be human. The Apostle John stressed often in his writing that Christ became flesh. I think this was an attempt by John to expose this heresy and make it clear to the early church that the deity of Christ dwelled bodily in human flesh (John 1:14; 1 John 4:2-3; 2 John 7; Luke 24:39-43).

This is good news to us because God came down to us by becoming flesh and took on a true human nature (except sin!). That is the concept of the God/Man. It is good news because we don’t have to climb up to God, he came down to us! Jesus took on our emotional life, physical life, and our mental life. In this way the elect can fully be redeemed from every aspect of our humanity that has been tainted by the fall. I think most Christians understanding of our redemption is limited too much on the blood, death, and resurrection of our Lord. I don’t think we should limit the work of our Lord to his merits on the cross. He didn’t just die for our justification but he lived his whole humanity for our justification. His perfect conformity to the righteous demands of God in thought, word, and deed will be imputed to the account of those who has true faith in him. This is good news! We can’t live it, he lived it for us! Those by faith will be able to withstand the holy justice of God at the final judgment because of the covering of Christ’s perfect conformity to God’s law.

The next entry I am going to expand on the idea of the God/Man and try to explain how the God/Man concept plays out in some scripture passages. So stay tune! It will get controversial. I am just setting up the stage now so that I will not be misunderstood.

Your Brother

Timotheus

Need to Clarify my KJV Statements

It seems that most of my Reformed brothers and sisters understood where I was coming from in my post about the word skubalon. Those of us in the Reformed camp are often on the same page theologically. However, I had a dear Pentecostal friend who responded negatively to my “KJV nazi” statement, and I want to attempt to explain what meant by that statement.

First off, I do have a tendency to shoot off my mouth in my writings. I apologized. Sometimes my comments can cause people to respond to my thoughts, which is what I want! I want promote discussion with my post on these blogs. Well the dear friend of mine did react, negatively. So, I will try to clarify my words. It will either clear them up or make it muddier.

In my home town’s phone directory under the heading Churches-Independent Fundamental there is a listing for Old Time Baptist Church KJ Only. That is the name of the church! A part of me would love to go to a worship service with my English Standard Version of the Bible under my arm to see what kind of reaction I will get. I know these people because I us to be one of these people. They believe that the King James Version of the Bible is the only inspired version of the scriptures and all other are the work of the devil. They are one I am calling the "KJV nazi". In their minds, all other English bibles are taboo. Most of their hostility is due to ignorance on scripture and they are very hostile to any minister or layman who is educated in solid theology.

I do maintain is that the scripture are the inspired, infallible, and the inerrant word of God, but the translators of the King James Version of the Bible are not inspired by the Holy Spirit like the writers of the scripture were. The inspired scriptures were written in Hebrew and Greek (with some Aramaic). Today there are many copies of the inspired scriptures. Scholarship has demonstrated that there are good reasons to believe that they are very accurate to the original wittings. Translators through out history have translated the word of God into the language of the people. Many paid for it with their lives.

Many of the major Bibles versions on the market today are, I think, pretty good. The major one I would include would be the King James Version, New King James Version, New American Standard, New International Version, and of course my choice the English Standard Version. There are other that are good and other that are not so good. There are some version of the Bible in which I would insist that you not to bring to any Bible study that I am leading.

There is nothing wrong with the King James Version of the Bible. I want to make that clear! But there are many things wrong with people who think that the problems in today’s churches are because many churches are not using the King James Version of the Bible. I like the English Standard Version is the Bible because it has many good solid Biblical scholars like JI Packer. I do believe that these men worked hard to translate a faithful rendering of the original manuscripts. A job which us laymen will never really understand what monstrous task that is.

Your Brother

Tim

PS - I hope this makes it clear for you my friend.
Click Here to read about the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrracy that was draft by many Evangelical leaders.

Skubalon?

Skubalon is a word that the Apostle Paul used in Philippians 3:8. It can be mildly translated "Dog doo doo," or some kind of excrement by an animal or possibly human. What I have learned about this word is very strong and could be considered by some to “bad language” (or Blue Laws) in the Roman or Jewish culture during the time of the Apostle Paul.

In Philippians 3:8 the ESV version of the Bible reads: “Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish [or skubalon], in order that I may gain Christ...”

The ESV, NASB, NKJV and the NIV versions translated this word as rubbish. The HCSB translated the word as filth. The NLT uses the word garbage. These translations failed to capture the true spirit of the meaning of the word. However, I think that the KJV version actually comes closer to the meaning of the word than any other versions by using the word dung. (That should please some of the KJV nazi out there!)

Obvious the translators of these various translations and paraphrases can’t upset our moralistic sensibilities of the most of the American “Christian” sub-culture so they opted to use less “colorful” wording.

I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to say if the text was really translated to reflex the meaning of the Greek word use by Paul the English versions could read as follows: “Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as bullshit, in order that I may gain Christ...”

It seems that word Paul uses is lot like the way we use the word bullshit in our culture. It may be shocking to some on the fundamentalists and moralistic folks in the church but this probably a very close translation. Obliviously, modern translators wimp-out!

I thought using this word would make a really good web address, and blog for promoting Reformed Theology. I think it is funny! So my web page that is under constant construction is www.skubalon.net . This blog is titled After Skubalon, Light which is a take off on a Latin slogan during the reformation Post Tenebras, Lux which means After Darkness, Light. My blog can easily be translated as After Bullshit, Light, which is where I was before I came to the Reformed understanding of the Christian faith.

Timotheus

Response to Understanding American Evangelicalism

White Horse Inn Broadcast of the week of January the 8th!

My goal for these entries under the label of The Roman Journey is give a written response to The Roman Revolutions on the White Horse Inn during the 2006 year.

I have spent early years of my Christian life recovering from all of the trends that come with being a follower of the American religion of self-salvation. I struggled with this since 1984 when I started working a local Christian bookstore. About 10 years later there has been a reformation of my heart. Like the Reformation of the 15th century where there was a recovery of the Gospel. I discovered the true content of the gospel that is not a part of the American religion. It started with RC Sproul teaching Justification from the book of Romans from a video series we sold at the bookstore that I worked.

I have been thinking a lot about John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me…” (ESV – of course) It is where I was many years ago. I would study the Bible with enthusiasm but Christ was not the center. My motivation was not to study the Bible to find Christ in all of the scripture but motivation was to prepare myself to win arguments. Really didn’t have the true spirit of apologetics at that time. I guess I was like the Pharisees because they were Bible lover but never could see that it was all about Him.

Like most Christian today they “have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge” (Roman 10:2 – ESV). I think most of the problem is because of the spiritual diet in the American Christianity. Today with books Purpose Driven Life and authors like Joel Osteen has created “a zeal” for God but not according to knowledge because many are being fed with spiritual junk food.

After firmly planted on the path of the Reformed faith I discovered the Confessions and Catechism of the early Reformation churches in the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible for the FIRST TIME! Wow! I said to myself. If I had read these confessions when I was younger my journey to the reformed faith wouldn’t have been so rough. The only thing I was every exposed to was a simple statement of faith of a church that I became a member of years ago. As I look back I am amazed how small it was. Well at least they had included the premillennial, pre-tribulational rapture in the statement of faith so that we agree on the important issue of the faith. I am sarcastic! And maybe I shouldn’t be!?!

More to come.

Timotheus
TimDaManWV on AIMS

The Exorcism of Emily Rose

The Exorcism of Emily Rose is one of my most favorite movies of the year. The number one is reason that this movie is my one of my favorite is because it is so well made. Many contemporary films, especially horror, are so over-done with digital enhancements that it losses its effectiveness dramatically. Of course, modern filmmakers make will always make use of some digital enhancements because it is useful tool in perfecting the film. However, when viewing many of the contemporary movies in the theater I feel that I am being treated to a light and sound show instead of a dramatically compelling story.

This film has some interesting effect, but watching the film I more involve in the story instead of being distracted with cool digital effects. Also many modern films are so over emphasizes with extreme camera moves to the point is can give the audience a headache. It is part of the MTV generation of filmmaking in which filmmakers are compelled to use extreme camera moves and special effects that distracts the audience from the story telling. The strength of this movie is that the drama of the story and the acting is what carry the movie along. A novel concept!

The special edition of the DVD has extra behind-the-scene features that give the viewers insight of the director passion for the art of filmmaking. I personally would like to see the evangelical community get more involve with the art especially film. I am sick of the Christian left and the Christian right’s (fundamentalism) self-righteousness of not seeing a good movie because it offends their moralistic sensibilities.

Many in the Christian community may not know that the director, Scott Derrickson, is Christian man (and may have reformational roots). I know this about him because heard I him talk with Mike Horton on they White Horse Inn. They have been friends for years. All the way back when Mike Horton had six-pack abs! They talked about Christianity and the arts. Many Christians think the only films that Christians should make are propaganda films like the Jesus movie and the Billy Graham movies of the 80’s and 90’s. I think Scott Derrickson it being true in his art by realistically portraying the clashes of worldviews of the liberal Christian, the Catholic, and the agnostic. I am sure if this was a Billy Graham production this whole film would focus on the alter call at the end with everybody singing 20th verse of Just As I Am.

Now don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that I support him just because he is a Christian. I support him because is a very skilled filmmaker. This movie kept me in the story, and the scares laterally scared the skubalon out of me! I never would support a doctor just because he is a Christian. He must be a good doctor first. Same here, Scott has to be good with the skills that God has given to him.

Hollywood needs filmmakers like Scott Derrickson. The reason Hollywood is so anti-Christian in today’s culture climate is because we in the Christian community has abandoned it to the pagans. We are not going to be able to change the Hollywood’s culture by being moralistic, or by protest and boycotts, or through avoidness of attendance and enjoyment of a good movie. Filmmakers like Scott Derrickson will have great influences on the Hollywood culture by being faithful to the vocation that God has gifted him with and to do that vocation with excellence!

In summation, I recommend the movie because it is well made. I know there will be some of you who will wimp out. I do highly recommend you check the commentary track on the DVD as well to hear about his passion for the art of filmmaking. By listening you hear that his thoughts are coming from a Christian worldview. I also amused with his comment that “he was not a Catholic.” With that said, I can’t wait to see what his next project will be. Love to hear anybody’s thoughts on the subject.

Your Brother

Tim

First Blog - What is Reformed Theology?

My purpose for this blog is to express my thoughts about Reformed Theology. Below is an overview of what is Reformed Theology. I welcome any comments from my fellow Christians (Reformed and non-Reformed alike). I will make ever attempt to respond to all posts and emails with this blog but keep in mind I may not be able to response to all of them.

Below is a brief article on what is Reformed Theology. It was written by the late by James Montgomery Boice. I originally saw it in The New Geneva Study Bible years ago.

I look forward to everyone's feedbacks:


Reformed Theology
by James Montgomery Boice

Reformed theology gets its name from the sixteenth century Protestant Reformation, with its distinct theological emphases, but it is theology solidly based on the Bible itself. Believers in the reformed tradition regard highly the specific contributions of such people as Martin Luther, John Knox, and particularly John Calvin, but they also find their strong distinctives in the giants of the faith before them, such as Anselm and Augustine, and ultimately in the letters of Paul and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Reformed Christians hold to the doctrines characteristic of all Christians, including the Trinity, the true deity and true humanity of Jesus Christ, the necessity of Jesus' atonement for sin, the church as a divinely ordained institution, the inspiration of the Bible, the requirement that Christians live moral lives, and the resurrection of the body. They hold other doctrines in common with evangelical Christians, such as justification by faith alone, the need for the new birth, the personal and visible return of Jesus Christ, and the Great Commission. What, then, is distinctive about reformed theology

1. The Doctrine of Scripture.

The reformed commitment to Scripture stresses the Bible's inspiration, authority, and sufficiency. Since the Bible is the Word of God and so has the authority of God Himself, reformed people affirm that this authority is superior to that of all governments and all church hierarchies. This conviction has given reformed believers the courage to stand against tyranny and has made reformed theology a revolutionary force in society. The sufficiency of Scripture means that it does not need to be supplemented by new or ongoing special revelation. The Bible is the entirely sufficient guide for what we are to believe and how we are to live as Christians.

The Reformers, and particularly John Calvin, stressed the way the objective, written Word and the inner, supernatural ministry of the Holy Spirit work together, the Holy Spirit illuminating the Word to God's people. The Word without the illumination of the Holy Spirit remains a closed book. The supposed leading of the Spirit without the Word leads to errors and excess. The Reformers also insisted upon the believers' right to study the Scripture for themselves. Though not denying the value of trained teachers, they understood that the clarity of Scripture on matters essential for salvation makes the Bible the property of every believer. With this right of access always comes the responsibility of careful and accurate interpretation

2. The Sovereignty of God.

For most reformed people the chief and most distinctive article of the creed is God's sovereignty. Sovereignty means rule, and the sovereignty of God means that God rules over His creation with absolute power and authority. He determines what is going to happen, and it does happen. God is not alarmed, frustrated, or defeated by circumstances, by sin, or by the rebellion of His creatures.

3. The Doctrines of Grace.

Reformed theology emphasizes the doctrines of grace, best known by the acronym TULIP, though this does not correspond to the best possible names for the five doctrines.

T stands for total depravity. This does not mean that all persons are as bad as they could possibly be. It means rather that all human beings are affected by sin in every area of thought and conduct so that nothing that comes out of anyone apart from the regenerating grace of God can please God. As far as our relationships to God are concerned, we are all so ruined by sin that no one can properly understand either God or God's ways. Nor do we seek God, unless He is first at work within us to lead us to do so

U stands for unconditional election. An emphasis on election bothers many people, but the problem they feel is not actually with election; it is with depravity. If sinners are as helpless in their depravity as the Bible says they are, unable to know and unwilling to seek God, then the only way they could possibly be saved is for God to take the initiative to change and save them. This is what election means. It is God choosing to save those who, apart from His sovereign choice and subsequent action, certainly would perish.

L stands for limited atonement. The name is potentially misleading, for it seems to suggest that reformed people want somehow to restrict the value of Christ's death. This is not the case. The value of Jesus' death is infinite. The question rather is what is the purpose of Christ's death, and what He accomplished in it. Did Christ intend to make salvation no more than possible? Or did He actually save those for whom He died? Reformed theology stresses that Jesus actually atoned for the sins of those the Father had chosen. He actually propitiated the wrath of God toward His people by taking their judgment upon Himself, actually redeemed them, and actually reconciled those specific persons to God. A better name for "limited" atonement would be "particular" or "specific" redemption.

I stands for irresistible grace. Left to ourselves we resist the grace of God. But when God works in our hearts, regenerating us and creating a renewed will within, then what was undesirable before becomes highly desirable, and we run to Jesus just as previously we ran away from Him. Fallen sinners do resist God's grace, but His regenerating grace is effectual. It overcomes sin and accomplishes God's purpose.

P stands for perseverance of the saints. A better name might be "the perseverance of God with the saints," but both ideas are actually involved. God perseveres with us, keeping us from falling away, as we would certainly do if He were not with us. But because He perseveres we also persevere. In fact, perseverance is the ultimate proof of election. We persevere because God preserves us from full and final falling away from Him.

4. The Cultural Mandate.

Reformed theology also emphasizes the cultural mandate, or the obligation of Christians to live actively in society and work for the transformation of the world and its cultures. Reformed people have had various views in this area, depending on the extent to which they believe such a transformation possible But on the whole they agree on two things. First we are called to be in the world and not to withdraw from it. This sets reformed believers apart from monasticism. Second, we are to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and visit the prisoner. But the chief needs of people are still spiritual, and social work is no adequate substitute for evangelism. In fact, efforts to help people will only be truly effective as their hearts and minds are changed by the gospel. This sets reformed believers apart from, mere humanitarianism. It has been objected to reformed theology that anyone who believes along reformed lines will lose · all motivation for evangelism. "If God is going to do the work, why should I bother?" But it does not work that way. It is because God does the work that we can be bold to join Him in it, as He commands us to do. We do it joyfully, knowing that our efforts will never be in vain.