Bible & Tech
Said at Southern points to a video interview with N. T. Wright that took place at Asbury Seminary in November of 2007. (Here’s the announcement about Wright’s visit.) Several minutes in Wright shares some brief thoughts on Piper’s book The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright.
The audio from Wright’s chapel talks is also available:
John Piper is one of my favorite living theologians. His writings and preaching have had a profound impact on my thinking, and he is regularly a means of great encouragement and motivation. I rarely find myself disagreeing with him.
I recently picked up the 24-volume John Piper Collection from Logos and have been enjoying working through Life As a Vapor. It’s composed of 31 chapters making it an ideal book to read for a month’s worth of devotional reading.
The second chapter is entitled “Suffering, Mercy, and Heavenly Regret,” in which Piper poses the question, “Is there regret in heaven?” He continues, “Can regret be part of the ever-increasing, unspeakable joy of the age to come, purchased by Jesus Christ (Romans 8:32)? My answer is yes” (19).
Piper reasons that since we will spend eternity praising Christ for ransoming us (e.g., Rev 5:9), we’ll certainly remember our sinful condition from which we’ve been ransomed. And those memories will yield feelings of regret.
[Read more…] about Is There Regret in Heaven?
In his section on the Trinity in The Doctrine of God,1 Frame gives four lines of explanation for texts that teach that the Son is in some sense less than or subject to the Father. He is commenting specifically on John 14:28; and 1 Corinthians 11:3; and 15:28.
In his first comment, Frame offers what strikes me as a potentially helpful perspective on the issue of the eternal subordination of the Son to the Father. Complementarians and egalitarians agree that during the incarnation the Son was functionally subordinate to the Father. Where they disagree is (1) how long that subordination lasts and (2) on what basis it exists. Frame thinks it lasts eternally on the basis of His eternal humanity.
[Read more…] about John Frame on 1 Corinthians 15:28 and Eternal Subordination
I’m baffled when I read egalitarians who think that functional hierarchy presupposes disunity or the prospect of it.
Take, for example, this statement by Gilbert Bilezikian:
One of the weirdest heresies that has been generated in the last century pertains to the postulation of a hierarchical order within the members of the Trinity—as if there ever could exist a threat of discord or of misconduct that would require the exercise of authority within the oneness of the Godhead.1
Kevin Giles is guilty of this fallacious reasoning as well:
What seems to have happened is that contemporary conservative evangelicals who are opposed to women’s liberation in the church and the home have read back into the Trinity their understanding of the subordination of women: God the Father has become the eternal “head” of Christ, and the differences among the divine persons have been redefined in terms of differing roles or functions. Rather than working as one, the divine persons have been set in opposition—with the Father commanding and the Son obeying.2
[Read more…] about Hierarchy Does Not Necessitate Opposition
Jenson, Robert W. “Reconciliation in God.” In The Theology of Reconciliation, edited by Colin E. Gunton, 158–66. London: T&T Clark, 2003.1
Jenson’s opening lines set the stage for his main thesis:
When I am invited to speak at a conference, I know I am supposed to indulge in the sort of trinitarian and christological speculation that skirts the edge of the sayable. So I have posed the question to myself: is there anything in God himself that might plausibly be called “reconciliation”? (158)
He goes on to argue that the traditional understanding of the Father begetting the Son and spirating the Spirit is inadequate because incomplete. He posits that the Spirit liberates the Father for the Son and reconciles the Son to the Father (158).
[Read more…] about Intratrinitarian Reconciliation?Dan Phillips of Biblical Christianity (and TeamPyro) posted about his new appreciation for John Frame. One of Frame’s former students, Tom Chantry, a Reformed Baptist pastor in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, chimed in with a lengthy appeal to “be very, very careful with John Frame.” I, of course, had to make a plug for the new Collected Works of John M. Frame, which I’m really looking forward to getting. But the interesting part was where John Frame responded to Tom. The exchange is worth a read.
Logos just released a new round of base packages labeled ND. No, that’s not an abbreviation for anything. They serve merely to distinguish the various versions of the base packages. The previous base packages were OC, the ones before that were QB, and the ones before that were RA. You can upgrade from your current OC package to the corresponding ND package for free (you pay only for the media and shipping). They’ve added the TNIV and NIrV to all of the base packages that include the NIV (i.e., all but Christian Home and Original Languages).
I’ve been reading Robert Letham’s excellent book The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship. It’s a must for any serious study of Trinitarianism. In many ways Letham represents a mediating position when it comes to the debates regarding subordination in the Trinity. He differs from someone like Wayne Grudem and maintains that talk of subordination and hierarchy in the ontological Trinity is inappropriate—even functional.1 However, he also differs from someone like Kevin Giles (cf. this post) who flattens out all the distinctions among Father, Son, and Spirit. Letham rightly sees τάξις (in the sense of order, not rank) in the Trinity. The various functions and roles of Father, Son, and Spirit are not arbitrary or reversible. The Father’s acting through the Son by the Spirit expresses ontological reality; the economic Trinity reveals the immanent Trinity.
While most of what I have to say about Letham’s book is positive, I have had a few minor issues here and there. For example, Letham maintains that most Western Christians are practical modalists. I’m not strongly opposed to Letham’s assertion, but he does a very poor job of establishing its veracity. Here’s what he says:
[Read more…] about Are You a Practical Modalist?