Introduction
I will never forget that Sunday. I was about thirteen years old—or maybe a little younger. Continue reading
`
I will never forget that Sunday. I was about thirteen years old—or maybe a little younger. Continue reading
Some objected to the critics of the Federal Vision that the social crisis is too great that to be arguing about the Federal Vision. That objection has resurface in recent days in the wake of a social media post in which a prominent member of the Young, Restless, and Reformed Movement and a Baptist theologian has argued, “The Father is the Father because he sends the Son. The Son is the Son because he submits to the Father’s will. The Spirit is the Spirit because the Father and the Son send Him. There is no Trinity without the order of authority and submission” (emphasis original). As one might imagine, this line of reasoning has prompted a considerable response. In response to the critics, some have re-stated the same argument made by the Federal Visionists and their enablers in 2008: “Are we really going to start arguing about ESS again? With all the other stuff going on in the world, this is the battle some of you want to fight? Again? I seriously do not understand some of you. Like, at all.” Continue reading →
Even as we were recording this episode last night a new round of controversy (on social media) arose over the orthodoxy of the doctrine of the so-called “eternal subordination of the Son” or the “eternal functional subordination of the Son” AKA “eternal . . . Continue reading →
The Heidelcast is back and better than ever, well, as mediocre as ever anyway. As I’m recording this it’s late July and I’m trying to finish the commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism. Something had to give way so I put the Heidelcast . . . Continue reading →
The Son’s generation involves no priority or posteriority, and certainly no inferiority but designates order alone. If it did involve priority or posteriority of any kind, then the Son would be inferior to the Father. Previously, I emphasized that the Son is . . . Continue reading →
XXVIII. This, then, is my position with regard to these things, and I hope it may be always my position, and that of whosoever is dear to me; to worship God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, Three . . . Continue reading →
Jason writes to ask: From a Christian perspective, how do we know that God is three persons (and not four or more)? Is it possible, from a Christian perspective, that God has only chosen to reveal three persons (but that God is . . . Continue reading →
We may shed further light on the nature of Warfield’s position by looking at the broader historical-theological context within which it emerges. Toward the conclusion of his ISBE article, Warfield offers a brief sketch of the history of Trinitarian doctrine. On his . . . Continue reading →
When the fullness of God’s self-revelation in Scripture is not taken into account, heresy is the result. Those who emphasize the oneness of God to the neglect of what Scripture teaches regarding the deity of the three persons fall into errors such . . . Continue reading →
In the last few episodes we have been considering the biblical, ecumenical (or creedal) doctrine of the Trinity. The God who is, is one in three persons. The historic doctrine of the Trinity is very clear. It is also great mystery but . . . Continue reading →
Augustine of Hippo used to say that what was concealed in the Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament and that is certainly true in case of the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. As we have discussed so far in the . . . Continue reading →
“It Came Upon The Midnight Clear” (now typically titled, “It Came Upon A Midnight Clear”) was first published in 1834. It was written by Edmund Hamilton Sears (1810–76), an Unitarian minister with Swedenborgian convictions. C. Michael Hawn, who teaches sacred music, describes . . . Continue reading →
I am excited to back behind the Heidelmic again and judging from the discussions I am seeing in print and online it looks like it is none too soon. James Dolezal has published an important new book, All That Is In God: . . . Continue reading →
3. The practical use of the doctrine of the Trinity. Thus the orthodox not only state the doctrine of the Trinity as the ground of all other Christian doctrine—they also state it as an eminently practical doctrine, as illustrated by the practical . . . Continue reading →
There strong indications in the Hebrew Scriptures that the God of the Bible is not only personal, but that he is multi-personal. In Genesis 1:1, Scripture says that Elohim (God) created the heavens and the earth. In the very next verse, however, . . . Continue reading →
Traditionally, at this place in theology, we should address the divine attributes in relation to the divine being/essence. Otto Weber (1902–66) challenged this approach by arguing that because Scripture reveals God first of all as Triune and his attributes in the light . . . Continue reading →
We may now readily perceive the difference between the Essence of God, and the Persons, subsisting in the divine essence. By the term, Essence, we are to understand, in reference to this subject, that which the eternal Father, Son, and Holy Spirit . . . Continue reading →
This is the 1st episode of our series on the doctrine of God, ““I AM That I AM.” In older histories of theology it used to be said of the Reformed that they started with the divine decree and deduced (i.e., drew . . . Continue reading →
Question 24. How are these articles divided? Answer. Into three parts: the first is of God the Father, and our creation; the second of God the Son, and our redemption; the third of God the Holy Spirit, and our sanctification. Exposition There . . . Continue reading →
So Burk argues that Christ’s not grasping for equality with God belongs not only to the economic but to the ontological Trinity. That is an extraordinary claim! He is asserting far more than a simple acknowledgement that the Father and Son are . . . Continue reading →