Theology

What Does TULIP in Calvinism Mean?

August 22, 2023 by wagraham Leave a Comment

I recently came across a social media post that described the Calvinist TULIP in the following way:

T= everyone hates God with all their heart even from the womb
U = for a mysterious reason God only loves and “elects” a few and damns the rest
L = Contrary to scripture, Jesus only died for some
I = God forces a few to love Jesus
P = irrelevant in light of Evanescent Grace

I have heard similar mischaracterizations before. However, comments under this post from Calvinists(!) attempted to defend TULIP without correcting this mischaracterization!

I am not that surprised. For years, I have heard Calvinists and non-Calvinists alike make odd claims about Calvinism and TULIP.

This post and its comments provide a useful teaching moment about what TULIP means. [Read more…] about What Does TULIP in Calvinism Mean?

Is Complementarianism Inherently Harmful?

July 21, 2023 by wagraham 4 Comments

During the last forty years, evangelicals have debated whether or not the Bible allows for women to occupy the role of elder or bishop. Egalitarians maintain that men and women may take the office of elder, while complementarians believe in a male-only episcopate. A host of other notions around gender and roles also appear in such discussions.

Yet I have noticed a recent shift in arguments. Yes, both sides still claim the Bible as their source for their conclusions. But egalitarians argue that complementarian teaching is inherently harmful or at least that it controls women. And since harming women is wrong (everyone agrees on this), it follows that complementarianism is wrong. [Read more…] about Is Complementarianism Inherently Harmful?

What are the Missions of God?

July 11, 2023 by wagraham Leave a Comment

The Bible teaches us about the sendings of the Persons of God. In Latin, the word sending translates missio, and so divine missions or divine sendings are the same things.

Augustine’s View on OT Theophanies in Anti-Arian Polemics

June 30, 2023 by wagraham Leave a Comment

Augustine and Vidu have made me re-think the notion that the Son is the Person usually revealed in Old Testament theophanies. If we say this, it makes it sound as if the Son is visible unlike the Father and Spirit who invisible (1 Tim 6:16).

I now think that the God generally reveals himself in OT theophanies by a created form (fire in the bush, angel of the Lord, a thunderous voice, etc.).

Theophanies Reveal God

Some theophanies by appropriation may better fit one Person, I suppose. But generally, the one God—Father, Son, and Spirit—reveals himself in the burning bush, and who names himself as “I AM.” “I AM” is the one God of Israel—Father, Son, and Spirit.

Augustine particularly convinces me of this argument as it’s easy to think that the Son would pre-reveal himself in the OT because he alone as a Person infleshes. But God is Spirit, and no one has seen God. We see Christ and thus see the F. in a unique way in the Incarnation.

To see the Son is to see the Father in the face of Christ. But if God by nature is invisible (1 Tim 1:17), then the Son and Spirit must too be invisible by nature or we have three gods. But we have one God (Deut 6:4).

Therefore, it’s inappropriate to say that the Son by nature is more likely to be visible in OT theophanies. The Incarnation is a unique event. It’s fitting due to relations of origin, not because the Son is more visible than the invisible Father.

Augustine’s Theological Context

Why does Augustine believe that OT theophanies are created effects of the one God, not a revelation of the Son in particular? To answer that question, we need to look at his anti-Arian theological context.

Although scholars like Vidu and Michel Barnes clarify Augustine’s anti-Arian context in De Trinitate, I also think Augustine makes it clear in his debate with Maximinus as to why he takes theophanies to be of God, not the Son in particular.

In his debate with Maximinus (an Arian Bishop), Maximinus argues strongly that the only-begotten God cannot have the name nature as the one God, the Father, because the Son was made visible in the OT through theophanies, and the one God is invisible (e.g., 1 Tim 1:17).

This likely explains why in De Trinitate Book II-IV Augustine spends so much time on theophanies. He wants to show that theophanies of God in the OT are of God under the form of a created effect, and not the Son Himself in a pre-Incarnate revelation of Himself.

Were that true, it would both suggest that the Son is by nature visible (so not the one God who by nature is invisible and whom nobody has ever seen) and that the Incarnation is a sort of progressive event. Both can’t true, since the Son is the one God of Israel made flesh in time.

However, this position does not mean a theophany cannot by appropriation say something of one Person. Maybe Jesus’s Baptism would illustrate the point, I am not sure yet.

Conclusion

For now, I find myself persuaded by Augustine. Theophanies reveal God.

Is the Threefold Division of the Law Biblical?

June 14, 2023 by wagraham Leave a Comment

While some people (today) disagree with the threefold division of mosaic law, all it is really saying is:

(1) The law regulates priestly service and rites (Hebrews says these are fulfilled in Jesus)

(2) The law regulates Israel’s political ordering, as God’s chosen people.

(3) The law contains eternal truths (e.g., the Ten Commandments) that are not temporary arrangements for Israelites like levitical rites and ceremonies or specific political arrangements for ancient Israel (like the ransom census of Exodus 30).

If Perfect love Casts out all fear, why Should we fear the Lord?

May 26, 2023 by wagraham 1 Comment

Maximus the Confessor is helping me understand the fear of the Lord better these days. I have found it a bit hard to understand how fear can be sinful, we should fear God, and yet love casts out all fear. The Bible speaks in different ways about fear.

Maximus goes straight to Jesus, as he always does, to clarify the idea of the fear in Scripture.