Discuss Theology

The dictionary in my word processor defines deism as “A belief in God based on reason rather than revelation, and involving the view that God has set the universe in motion but does not interfere with how it runs.” I think this is about as simple and clear a definition as is needed.

Many of you know the history of deism, which came out of the enlightenment, or modern era. The idea was also associated with those who cut off the creature/Creator distinction from theology and philosophy. In time nature, as well as man, became autonomous from God, operating by its own laws. This was a radical departure from traditional and biblical theology. In time God was seen as an impersonal being who had no control over His creation. Man’s freewill made it impossible for Him to exercise control and natural law was so fixed, God was no longer allowed to act supernaturally in the realm of nature.

In the end creation was deified and was made autonomous from its creator. The creation has said in effect, “Let us make God in our image, after our likeness”. Nature has become free, autonomous, the arbiter, the savior, definer of all things and sovereign. And we have made god impersonal and weak.

In New Orleans we speak of a natural disaster. But is this right? Are there natural disasters? Is nature and man truly free to act as they please? Is nature able to become personal outside of its creator and can it bring about a single act outside of the will of God? Are they a law unto themselves? Is it, or we, autonomous? I think not!

The true Israel has always known God to be personal and in control of His creation. In short, God is sovereign. We have never believed that a reasonable god would set the universe in motion and not interfere with how it runs. Colossians 1:16-17 speaks of Jesus in these words, “For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or Dominions or rulers or authorities – all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together”. This is not an impersonal, or detached, Creator.

New Orleans was not a natural disaster, nor was the destruction of Nineveh or Babel. Try as hard as we might to understand God’s reasons, which I will not attempt, we are left with God’s sovereignty. We may not understand how a loving God could do such a thing, but we can’t go defining God by our standards. Because in the end our attempts will lead us to an attempt to, “Let us make God in our image”.

This should not lead us to being callous toward the people of New Orleans. This should drive us to humbly seek God and get on with the great commission. God is sovereign and is worthy of the praise of His creation. May New Orleans rise out of darkness and into the glorious light of our Savior.

“[T]he statements made regarding Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are to be understood as transcending all time, all ages, and all eternity. For it is the Trinity alone which exceeds the comprehension not only of temporal but even of eternal intelligence; while other things which are not included in it are to be measured by times and ages.”

ANF, vol.4, Hendrickson Pub, 1999, pg. 377

“As, then, after those first discussions which, according to the requirements of the case, we held at the beginning regarding the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, it seemed right that we should retrace our steps, and show that the same God was the creator and founder of the world, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, i.e., that the God of the law and of the prophets and of the Gospel was one and the same; and that, in the next place, it ought to be shown, with respect to Christ, in what manner He who had formerly been demonstrated to be the Word and Wisdom of God became man; it remains that we now return with all possible brevity to the subject of the Holy Spirit.

It is time, then that we say a few words to the best of our ability regarding the Holy Spirit, whom our Lord and Saviour in the Gospel according to John has name the Paraclete. For as it is the same God Himself, and the same Christ, so also it is the same Holy Spirit who was in the prophets and apostles, i.e., either in those who believed in God before the advent of Christ, or in those who by means of Christ have sought refuge in God. We have heard, indeed, that certain heretics have dared to say that there are two Gods and two Christs, but we have never known of the doctrine of two Holy Spirits being preached by any one. For how could they maintain this out of Scripture, or what distinction could they lay down between Holy Spirit and Holy Spirit, if indeed any definition or description of Holy Spirit can be discovered? For although we should concede to Marcion or to Valentinus that it is possible to draw distinction in the question of Deity, and to describe the nature of the good God as one, and that of the just God as another, what will he devise, or what will he discover, to enable him to introduce a distinction in the Holy Spirit? I consider, then that they are able to discover nothing of any kind whatever.”

ANF, vol. 4, Hendrickson Pub, 1999, pg. 284-285

I remember at Gordon-Conwell, one of my theology professors stated that if we looked at a person’s ethic, we would understand his or her theology and opinion of God. Liberation theologian, Leonardo Boff made a profound statement underlining this, “The idea of a divine Monarchy[ 'even monarchy of the Father' within a weakly developed model of the Trinity] justifies hierarchical notions of human society in which emperors, kings and dictators rule over all and men dominate women and children in families.” [The Trinity, Roger Olson, Christopher Hall, p. 106]

“Now, what the Holy Spirit is, we are taught in many passages of Scripture, as by David in the fifty-first Psalm, when he says, “And take not Thy Holy Spirit from me;” and by Daniel, where it is said, “The Holy Spirit which is in thee.” And in the New Testament we have abundant testimonies, as when the Holy Spirit is described as having descended upon Christ, and when the Lord breathed upon His apostles after His resurrection, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit;” and the saying of the angel to Mary, “The Holy Spirit will come upon thee;” the declaration by Paul, that no one can call Jesus Lord, save by the Holy Spirit. In the Acts of the Apostles, the Holy Spirit was given by the imposition of the apostles’ hands in baptism. From all which we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit. Who, then, is not amazed at the exceeding majesty of the Holy Spirit, when he hears that he who speaks a word against the Son of man may hope for forgiveness; but that he who is guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has not forgiveness, either in the present world or in that which is to come!”

ANF, vol. 4, Hendrickson Pub, 1999, pg. 252

Kevin Giles quotes, JND Kelly:”By placing the unity of the Trinity ‘squarely in the foreground’says JND Kelly, Augustine, ‘rigorously excluded subordinationism of every kind.’”
Kevin Giles, Discovering Biblical Equality, 343.