The CBE Scroll

Comment by faith

November 18, 2008 @ 9:18 pm

The Holy Spirit is strangely absent in the debates about subordination and the trinity except to say that the Holy Spirit is also subordinate.

Isn’t that interesting.

Comment by Janet

November 18, 2008 @ 10:35 pm

Actually, Focus on the Family in their dvd series The Truth Project [which is mostly good teaching except of course on marriage and the Trinity] teaches a very strange doctrinal understanding.

In order to get their complementarian view to work, they use an authoritarian hierarchy that compares the Father to the husband, Jesus to the wife and the Holy Spirit to the children in the marriage.

They don’t go into much detail on their comparison, however, they seem to imply that the since the Holy Spirit comes from the Father to the Son and from the Son to Christians [God's children] in the same way the children come from a husband and wife.

Of course, this is completely unBiblical, but there it is.

What do you all think?

In Christ,
Janet

Comment by jlp

November 18, 2008 @ 11:41 pm

Janet,

Can the truth project be accessed over the internet? Is there a link for it? I want to check out where they compare the Father to the husband and the Son to the wife. Since no comparison of this nature is ever made in scripture I want to see how Focus on the Family presents it.

Thanks.

Comment by cello

November 19, 2008 @ 8:06 am

Maybe I’m the only one to have thought this but isn’t projecting any kind of human relationship into eternity adding on to the Bible – which is expressly forbidden by the Bible? They are attempting to speak for God in areas where the Bible never speaks. Jesus does say people aren’t married in heaven and AFAIK doesn’t speak to human relationships beyond that.

Comment by faith

November 19, 2008 @ 10:24 am

Cello, I think that in some way it is trying to make God into our own image. While human images are helpful in understanding the character of God, such images are to teach something specific not make God into our image.

Paul warns us to live according to the Spirit not according to the flesh. Sometimes I think that we think too much in terms of flesh. I think the masculinity movement errors on too much emphasis on the flesh… particularly the masculine flesh verses the feminine flesh.

I don’t think we should reduce God to flesh. Jesus came as a human and a male but the emphasis is more on his humanity. God added to himself humanity and dwelt among us. But God is not in his essence flesh. God is Spirit. God is Love. God is Truth. God is Light.

The Spirit indwells God’s children but we cannot say that the Spirit is a child in the family of God. The Spirit helps us know we are God’s children but is not God’s child. The Spirit is God present in the church and among his children. The Spirit is God acting in and among the children of God. I don’t see anywhere in the Bible where the Spirit is considered a child. That’s an imposition.

interesting that they would compare the Spirit with a child.

Comment by Janet

November 19, 2008 @ 12:49 pm

Hi,
here is the link to the Truth Project: http://www2.focusonthefamily.com/focusmagazine/christianliving/A000000190.cfm
Here is the trailer on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ8ikrDisDU

I don’t think there is anything available on the marriage part. Lesson 2 and lesson 5 on ethics and science are available on youtube.

But it is lesson 7 on Sociology: The Divine Imprint that discusses the “series of relationships that flow out of and reflect the Trinitarian nature of the Creator” – family, church, community, state, labor and the union between God and man.

I think you can buy the series online, but I am not sure if you have to go through the series first to be able to purchase it, or if you can just purchase it.

In Christ,
Janet

Comment by Janet

November 19, 2008 @ 1:01 pm

Dear Cello and Faith,

I think this is absolutely what their are doing. They so want authority to be the main issue between a husband and wife, that they re-create the Trinity to have an authority structure between the Father and Son, and by implication – the Holy Spirit is under authority of both.

Lesson 7 actually goes into a discussion of submission and ‘love your wife like Christ loves the Church’ – really going after the husbands stating that if you don’t love your wife, God won’t answer your prayers or they will be hindered. They present the case for love for the wife and respect for the husband as the main requirements. It is actually one of the better, balanced discussions I have seen on this area, in terms of also focusing on the husband to a significant degree.

Unfortunately, they do not provide proper definitions for either submission, love or respect. They also pick and choose Scriptures to support their authority structure doctrine in the Trinity.

It is too bad, because most of the series is quite excellent and then they throw this in and ruin it.

In christ,
Janet

Comment by Janet

November 19, 2008 @ 1:17 pm

Hi, another link: http://www.thetruthproject.org/events/A000000068.cfm

Overview of Lesson 7

In this tour and in the ones to follow, we are emphasizing the “roles” within the Triune nature of God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We have done so to highlight its imprint upon the social order that He has created. In doing so, however, it is possible that someone may wrongly begin to perceive the persons of the Trinity as separate beings. They are not.

One must never lose sight of the reality that God is One—one in essence and being. He exists in three persons, yet each is fully and wholly God. The Son is fully God, not a separate God. The Holy Spirit is fully God, not a separate being. So God is truly one in essence because each person of the Trinity is one in essence with the other.

But, God is not only one in essence, but He is one in unity. The three persons of the Trinity exist in complete oneness. Each person of the Trinity carries out a unique role and performs unique operations, yet they remain one in essence and one in unity. This is the nature of the eternal God.

All of this is mysterious, yes. But not so mysterious that we cannot comprehend its reality. The “mystical union” that exists within the Triune nature of God has also been impressed upon His creation. I do not understand how the flesh and the spirit within me are joined together. I do not understand how my wife and I have become “one flesh”. I do not understand how the Spirit of God can dwell within me and somehow be united with me. Paul cries out in reference to these matters and calls it a “profound mystery”.

So, when we refer to the Son being in submission to the Father, we are referring to the relationship that exists between the second “person” of the Trinity and the first “person” of the Trinity. When we refer to the Holy Spirit “proceeding” from the Father and the Son, we are referring to the unique operation that the Father and the Son carry out and the implied relationship that exists between the Holy Spirit and the Father and the Son. Yet, we are dealing with one God, one Being, one in essence and unity.

II. Social Order – The Divine Imprint
A. “It is not good” – Genesis 2:18 – Why was it “not good” for man to be alone?
B. Triune structure stamped upon Social Order
1. God – Father, Son, Holy Spirit
2. Family – Husband, Wife, Children
3. Church – Christ, Leaders, Flock
4. Our world – Three realms – Physical, Spiritual and Social
C. Relationships, Roles, Authority, Submission and Unity within social spheres

Comment by cello

November 19, 2008 @ 1:49 pm

I have a question regarding the Social Order as noted in Janet’s post above – I’ve noticed an increase in pastors teaching submission to church leaders on a variety of topics. One recent sermon I heard was that Christians who didn’t officially join a church and thereby submit themselves to a church authority were violating God’s law. Another time it was in relation to “don’t criticize or question your pastor”. I don’t know how Biblical that it is but I don’t remember hearing this type of stuff when I was a kid. This seems to be unduly authoritarian (and I can see how it ties together with a male-female authoritarian mindset) but I would like to hear others comments on it?

Comment by jlp

November 19, 2008 @ 4:24 pm

A group of elders decided to fire that pastor of a church without asking for any input from the members of the church. When I told one of the elders that many people in the church disagreed with the elders decision to fire the pastor, the elder replied “That’s sin.” These same elders, right after they fired the pastor, told the staff from now on that they, the elders had unilaterally authority over everything and were to be submitted to by the staff in everything. As a result of both these actions the church split, and all the staff members (out of about 20) left except for one.

Comment by jlp

November 19, 2008 @ 4:26 pm

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That applies to church and marital relationships as well as well to politics.

Comment by Trevor

November 19, 2008 @ 6:34 pm

At this point (ie. in reference to the place the Holy Spirit has been given by complementarians), it seems to me, that we have a very interesting twist in this Trinitarian debate. According to a book review done by Kevin Giles on one of Wayne Grudem’s latest books, Evangelical Feminism, (see Pricilla Papers volume 22 number 3, Summer 2008) Grudem judges all fellow evangelicals who disagree with him, on the permanent subordination of women as God’s ideal, as theological liberals. He (Grudem) even goes so far, within the book, as to naming them! As is to be expected they are all authors that are known, respected and avidly read by most egalitarians.

But here is the twist. On this point, (ie. the understanding and interpretation of the nature of the Godhead), we egalitarians, or to use Grudem’s term, evangelical feminists, are far more inclined to want to be true to what the bible actually states than allowing ourselves to be influenced by human, or familial comparisons. As I often recall one of my early pastoral mentors saying, “Analogies are a great interpretive tool for shedding light on a subject, but, if pushed too far they are likely to break down.” It seems to me that this is a case in point. The analogy has become, or is in danger of becoming, the truth at the expense of the plain teaching of scripture.

Comment by Ruud Vermeij

November 20, 2008 @ 3:31 am

Before I ever heard of subordination in the Trinity between the Father and the Son, I heard the theory that it is not allowed to pray to the Holy Spirit. At that moment, I found this very strange, because I grew up in a church where this was common practise…

Comment by jlp

November 20, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

I’ve been in churches where people prayed to the Holy Spirit. At first I had a hard time accepting this, but then I considered that the Godhead is three in one, and that when you pray to one you are praying to all three.

Comment by Lin

November 24, 2008 @ 3:17 pm

“Another flaw in this teaching of subordination is that the only comparisons are from Ephesians 5 and the Genesis account of God’s statements after Adam & Eve sinned for the first time.”

I have not yet read all the comments but want to point out that Bruce Ware uses, if you can believe it, 1 Corinthians 11:3, as his foundation verse for ESS.

Comment by Lin

November 24, 2008 @ 3:33 pm

Trevor, Great comment!

As to this…

“B. Triune structure stamped upon Social Order
1. God – Father, Son, Holy Spirit
2. Family – Husband, Wife, Children
3. Church – Christ, Leaders, Flock
4. Our world – Three realms – Physical, Spiritual and Social
C. Relationships, Roles, Authority, Submission and Unity within social spheres”

This is what I object to. They are making a declarative statement that the ‘triune structure’ is stamped on the social order.

So, they start with a wrong premise. There is no ‘chain of command’ within the eternal Trinity (outside of the brief Incarnation) that they can map to for earthly hierarchies. They have to invent it.

It really breaks down when they get to church structure. Scripture teaches that we are all ministers in the Holy Priesthood. There are no offices only functions and all are important and equal (the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you). Jesus is our High Priest and we are all free to go directly to Him. That cuts out any ‘earthly authority’ within the Body. There is no ‘laity’ in the Body of Christ. That is a myth. We are all ‘clergy’ with different giftings to edify the Body.

This is just more Patriarchy. People who crave power and influence over others. To teach this, they have to ignore a ton of scripture on servanthood, not lording it over others, all the one anothers, etc.

If we take their teaching seriously, then those who refused to drink kool aid with Jim Jones would be in sin. After all, he had a church and a title. We do not follow after men. We follow after Christ. The only authority in the Body is Jesus Christ and His Word. We are just messengers and instruments.

BTW: My mind shuts down when I see the word, Roles, used to define anyone or anything in Christendom. Roles are parts people play in pretend. We are allowing this word to become mainstream.
We should always question its use when describing fellow belivers. We are to BE in Christ. We never play a role. We are to be ‘Christlike’. It is not a role. A role can quickly turn into works.

Comment by cello

November 25, 2008 @ 8:25 am

There was an article in the Washington Post last week about a church pastor using the concept of “leader authority” to create his little empire (that includes a fleet of race cars, which he justified by using them to evangelize the Nascar circuit).

The image I keep on getting is the Pope and the Catholic Church. If “leader authority” is such the thing, should we defer to Rome? After all, Martin Luther, according to the social model concept, committed sin by defying church authority.

Comment by Hubert Edgar

December 2, 2008 @ 3:01 pm

I often pray to the Spirit. I pray to Him when I am praying for the lost. That’s one of His primary functions, so why wouldn’t I go there.

More on point: When Julie and I got married, my father did the service. His pre-marital counseling consisted of love-your-wife obey-your-husband. He went so far as to say that the wife does not have to love her husband, only obey him. The husband has the mandate to love the wife and be sure he leads her correctly.

This was the man who also taught me it was poor exegesis to develop a doctrine based on a single Scripture. It can be so easy, and so disastrous, if you forget to apply good exegetical practice when interpreting Scripture. This subordination of the Son & Spirit is a heresy in point. It’s also taking an image of God, marriage, and trying to make the Trinity conform to that image. (Someone mentioned that earlier and I can’t seem to find it to credit the thought.) We have images about God because it’s as close as we can get to understanding Him.

If Jesus is the equivalent of the wife, is He a She? Also, if Jesus is the wife, how can the Church be the Bride of Christ? This whole analogy leads only to full-scale confusion because it’s being so warped out of shape!

I’d thought about the question of where the Spirit fits and find this discussion enlightening. Thanks!

Comment by faith

December 3, 2008 @ 8:18 am

that’s the deal Hubert, analogies only go so far. Stretching them leads to wierdness.

Comment by Frank

December 9, 2008 @ 1:09 pm

As I have pondered the outline of the Focus on the Family lesson on “Sociology” posted by Janet (87635), and reviewed some materials by my friend and mentor, Dr. Robert K. Wright, it strikes me that complementarians, who so earnestly promote a hierarchical sociology for both the Triune God and humanity, fail to realize this concept comes not from the Bible, but from pagan, Greek metaphysics, in which reality was understood in terms of a “Great chain of being” with the Being at the top being the fullest and most perfect in wisdom, power, goodness, beauty, etc. while, the further down the chain you went, the less perfect and complete the various beings became. This concept was behind not only the varied levels attributed to the gods and daemons by the Greeks, but also the hierarchical order of Greek society with the autocrats at the top and slaves at the bottom.
Moreover, in this metaphysics, which colored the thinking of Arius and his followers, any being derived from, generated from, or emanating from the Supreme Being was less divine than he the further down the chain they were located. Herman Bavinck has this to say on the subject, which applies to what we’re discussing about the neglect of the Spirit:

“The essence of Arianism is that it denies the Son’s consubstantiality with the Father; in other words, it affirms that in the absolute sense of the word, the Father alone is God. It follows, of course, that the Son is a being inferior in rank: that he does not share the divine nature. Arianism places the Son somewhere between God and the creaturely universe but allows a wide margin of interpretation in regard to the exact place he occupies”(Doctrine of God, p.288)

And when he discusses the various forms Arianism has taken in the Church and how it has affected the view of Christ and the Holy Spirit, Bavinck further states,

“This ancient form of the error with which we are dealing found favor with many post-Reformation theologians, especially in England. Milton, e.g., taught the Son and the Holy Spirit, who existed before the creation of the world, owed their creation to the Father’s free will and it was only because of their office that they were called God.”

Things seem never to change, do they.

Comment by Gwen Meharg

December 19, 2008 @ 1:44 pm

This goes back to 87635 Janet speaking of Focus’ focus on men loving and women respecting.

I have a very precious widower friend who has been alone for a long time and is closing in on being ready to marry again. A while back we were talking about these teachings. Finally I asked “George”, “Is that what you are looking for? Respect? Is that enough for you?”
The answer was, of course, no. He wants to love and to be loved. The premise that respect is all a man wants or needs is also wrong. We all need respect and we all need love.

Comment by Frank

December 29, 2008 @ 1:11 pm

I wonder if another reason the Holy Spirit is either ignored or misrepresented in this debate is because of how, both in Scripture and the writings of early Christian theologians, he is clearly represented as a Divine Person who, as the equal of the Father and Son and so intimate with them, has perfect knowledge of their thoughts and desires and so when he gives us the “mind of Christ”, he conveys to us this unity of heart, mind and will, a unity of consensus as it were, which he then imparts to us as the body and people of Christ. Something not compatible with chain of command ideology?

Comment by Frank

December 30, 2008 @ 1:02 pm

I apologize if my comment the other day (87776)appeared confusing. I had been pondering some NT texts (i.e., Jn 16:12-15; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 12:1-18; and 1 Jn 3:19-24)and was struggling for words to express what I perceived these texts revealed about the 3 Divine Persons so living in and through one another in complete communion and fellowship that whatever conscious distinctiveness each Divine Person might have from the Other, yet such is the unity, harmony and mutual agreement of thought, desire and will that, when Scripture says, for example, the Spirit distributes spiritual gifts “just as he determines” it could equally be understood “just as they determine,” for the Father, Son and Spirit are one in mind, desire, and will regarding this distribution of gifts and ministerial calling.

Comment by jlp

December 30, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

Frank,

I couldn’t have said it better myself. That’s exactly how I feel also.

Comment by Frank

January 2, 2009 @ 12:02 pm

Thanks, JLP, for your kind support (87778). Have you read Patrick S. Franklin’s PP article, “Women Sharing in the Ministry of God: A Trinitarian Framework for the Priority of Spirit-Gifting as a Solution to the Gender Debate”? On the basis of the unity of the Father, Son, and the Spirit in both the distribution of spiritual gifts and the call to ministry, he provides a good theolgical framework for explaining and comfirming why “women should be welcomed and encouraged to serve in positions of church leadership and authority, and that [Spirit] giftedness and not gender should determine a person’s qualification to serve” (PP, Vol. 22, No.4, Autumn 2008, p. 14). And it will help to better answer those who say our arguments on the priority of the Spirit’s gifting and calling are primarily experiential, rather theological derived from Scripture. I highly recommend this article.

Comment by JLP

January 3, 2009 @ 1:30 pm

I don’t remember if I read it or not. I will check it out. Thanks. I think PP is Priscilla Papers, am I correct?

Comment by jlp

January 4, 2009 @ 8:24 pm

Frank, I tried to read it but I had a hard time understanding it. I don’t think my theological knowledge was high enough to follow the article.