What's the big deal about the Trinity?

Often we may wonder, how big a deal is the Trinity, really? Sure the early Christians spent lots of time debating and clarifying what the Bible teaches. But when you hear or read some of the technical discussions, we might easily wonder if it is all too esoteric. I was reflecting about this again recently, and these are some of the things I think really are a big deal about the Trinity...

• In the well-known verse, John 3:16, we are told that, "God so loved the world, that he gave  his only Son", with echos of Abraham and Isaac in Genesis 22. If the Father and the Son were not distinct persons, what would this really mean? It is because of the real love between the two real persons, the Father and the Son, that we understand the magnitude of his great love for us. If we remove the distinction of persons, or if Jesus is only a human, or something else sub-God, we gut the gospel of its greatness, and the good news is not nearly quite as good as it should be.
• In another classic quote from the apostle John, John 1:14 tells us that "the Word became flesh". Or as we realize concerning Jesus from the apostle Paul, as he expresses it in Philippians 2:6-8, that "being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross". If Jesus is something less than God, then the great humility which we should see in the incarnation leading to Christ's "foolish" death, becomes so much less humble than we really should see it to be, and again we rob the real gospel of its real power.
• And as others have pointed out, that God is fundamentally plural, means that he is also fundamentally relational, and it makes so much more sense that, fundamentally, "God is love" (the apostle John again, 1 John 4:8 and 1 John 4:16). God was not just potentially loving, but there have always been others within the Trinity whom God could and did actively love. Isn't it a really big deal that not just power or authority (or whatever else) is fundamental to who God is, but (and perhaps more so) that love really is fundamental to who God is? No wonder that love is part of the DNA of God's universe, and why love is such a big deal in human (= made in God's image) relationships.

I suppose there are other things that could be said. Nonetheless, it wouldn't have been too long ago that I couldn't have even articulated the above things. And I think those things are a pretty big deal. Plenty big enough. So yes, the Trinity is a big deal :)

Calvin on Continuity and Discontinuity of Mosaic Law

The question of the relevance of Mosaic Law to the Christian today is a constant issue. On the one hand the NT can quote the Law as authoritative, and on the other has statements about the Christian no longer being under the law, etc. How are we to navigate through all this, and what is the right way to handle to Word of God on these matters?

Calvin gives a helpful summary in his commentary on the "four last books of Moses". Here are some excerpts from "The Use of the Law"...

1. Regarding the continuing use of the Law as "the rule of living well and righteously", after finding justification in Christ and being regenerated by the Spirit

Hence it appears that it is expedient for them to be slain by the Law, and that the death which it inflicts is life-giving. And this occurs in two ways; for, first, being stripped of the false opinion of their righteousness, wherein they prided themselves, they begin to seek in Christ what they mistakenly supposed might be found in themselves, so as to please God by gratuitous reconciliation, whereas they had previously sought to propitiate Him by the merit of their works; secondly, they learn that they are not sufficient to perform a single tittle of the Law, unless, being regenerated by God’s Spirit, they who were the slaves of sin live unto righteousness. And hence, in fine, the utility and fruit of the teaching of the Law proceeds; for, until we are renewed and God has given us hearts of flesh instead of hearts of stone, in vain are precepts dinned in our ears, since in our natural depravity we cordially reject them; but when He has engraved His law within our hearts, its outward instruction also profits us; for He so governs His children by the Spirit of reconciliation, as at the same time to will that they should be attentive and obedient to His voice. Still, because they are always far from attaining to perfect observance of it, they not only learn from it what is right, but also that they have need of His gratuitous mercy, that they may please Him through indulgence and grace, although they are still conscious of much infirmity.

2. Regarding how Paul seems to abrogate the Law, and speaks of discontinuities, when contrasting the Gospel with  a Judaism that rejects Christ

Further, because Paul seems to abrogate the Law, as if now-a-days it did not concern believers, we must now see how far this is the case. And, first, indeed, it is easy to perceive that he does not treat of the Law in the abstract, but sets it forth invested with those of its qualities, wherein it is opposed to the Gospel; for, inasmuch as his controversy was with those who interpreted it amiss, he could not help contrasting the Law with the Gospel, as if they were in opposition to each other: not that they were really so, if their respective doctrine be dexterously applied to its proper object, but because such a conflict arose from the absurd mixture, which the false apostles introduced. They asserted that men are justified by the works of the Law, and, if this were admitted, the righteousness of faith was destroyed, and the Gospel fell to the ground. They, moreover, restored the yoke imposed on the ancient people, as if no liberty had been obtained by the blood of Christ. In this discussion it was necessary for Paul to advert only to that which is peculiar to Moses, and distinct from Christ; for although Christ and Moses perfectly accord in the substance of their doctrine, still, when they are compared with each other, it is fitting to distinguish what is peculiar to each. In this respect Paul calls the Law “the letter,” because Moses had no other charge than to speak in the name of God, (2 Corinthians 3:6;) and this in itself is not only useless, but also deadly; for when the word resounds in the ears only, it produces nothing but condemnation. Besides, he considers the Law as connected with promises and threatenings. Whence it follows, that salvation can only be procured by it if its precepts be exactly fulfilled. Life is indeed promised in it, but only if whatever it commands be complied with; whilst, on the other hand, it denounces death against its transgressors, so that to have offended in the slightest point is enough to condemn and destroy a person; and thus it overwhelms all men with despair. Lastly, because the ceremonies by which God prepared His ancient people as by puerile and elementary instruction for the faith of the Gospel, were annexed to the Law, Paul embraces those also in his comparison between the Law and the Gospel. Hence it follows that, in so far as Moses is distinguished from Christ, his ministration has ceased, although his embassy was identical with that which Christ afterwards discharged. As regards the ceremonies, we must consider that an end was put upon them by Christ’s coming, in such a way as to establish their truth more firmly than as if they still remained in use: for we acknowledge that in them, as in a mirror, was formerly shewn to the Fathers, what is now displayed to us in its reality. Whence it appears that they are greatly mistaken who altogether reject as useless that instruction which we read in the writings of Moses; and that the squeamishness of those who despise it is also intolerable.

At the end, Calvin also helpfully refers back to further treatment in his Institutes: "Let my readers seek in the Second Book of my Institutes, Chapter 7., what further tends to the explanation of this subject."

John Stott on Missions and Authentic Christianity

Some challenging and helpful words, from the late John Stott (1921-2011)...

"...missions lies at the very heart of our generous God. The church without mission is a church no longer. Since an essential part of its identity is missing.

So, now listen, some of us need to repent. If we have allowed the missionary dimension of the church to drop out of our thinking, we need to repent. A church without mission is a church no longer. And if we have resisted or neglected the missionary dimension of the church, we must repent.

Now, tell me. Do you claim to believe in God? He is a missionary God! You tell me you are committed to Christ? He is a missionary Christ! You claim to be filled with the Spirit? He is a missionary Spirit! You tell me you belong to the church? It’s a missionary society! And you hope to go to heaven when you die? It’s a heaven into which the fruits of world mission have been gathered! So, we must get involved. We cannot stand aloof from the mission of God. The authentic Christianity of the Bible is not a safe, smug, selfish, comfortable, escapist, little religion. No, it is an explosive, centrifugal force. It pulls us out from our self absorption and it flings us into God’s world to witness and to serve."

[Source: https://us.langham.org/…/au…/our_god_is_a_missionary_god.mp3]

Sinclair Ferguson on Righteousness and Meritoriousness

I was listening to this old talk by Sinclair Ferguson, speaking about the attributes of God. By bouncing off of Deuteronomy 24:13, he makes some thoughtful and helpful comments on how we should think about the idea of "righteousness" as used in the Scriptures...

So we need to dissolve from our understanding of righteousness any notion of meritoriousness that may have crept into our thinking. Righteousness means integrity of relationship to the covenant requirements. And consequently righteous acts in Scripture are thus nuanced. Again, in terms of human righteousness, when the saints in the Old Testament appeal to their own righteousness, they are appealing not to some Old Testament principle of meritoriousness, but to the integrity of relationship in which they stand to God, in terms of the covenant with them he has made. And consequently, righteousness set within this covenant context, manifests itself, in a multifaceted way, and with a series of nuances. Thus for example, Geerhardus Vos, suggests there are at least five different categories employable to expound the nuances of righteousness. Barton Payne in his Theology of the Older Testament suggests that there are nine. But we who like to be simple believers will suggest that we can focus our attention on two of those aspects which point up the vital characteristic of divine righteousness, namely the principle that in Scripture the righteousness of God is manifested both in terrible condemnation and in merciful deliverance. And this is so because of the absolute integrity of God to the revelation he has given of himself in his covenant. And if we lack that perspective, we are bound to minimize in one direction or another, what the concept of divine righteousness means, either limiting it to retributive justice or to love and grace.

John Owen on Preaching Preparation

Some good advice from John Owen, from his last years of ministry, part of a sermon preached at another's ordination..

I think, truly, that no man preaches that sermon well to others that doth not first preach it to his own heart. He who doth not feed on, and digest, and thrive by, what he prepares for his people, he may give them poison, as far as he knows; for, unless he finds the power of it in his own heart, he cannot have any ground of confidence that it will have power in the hearts of others. It is an easier thing to bring our heads to preach than our hearts to preach. To bring our heads to preach, is but to fill our minds and memories with some notions of truth, of our own or other men, and speak them out to give satisfaction to ourselves and others: this is very easy. But to bring our hearts to preach, is to be transformed into the power of these truths; or to find the power of them, both before, in fashioning our minds and hearts, and in delivering of them, that we may have benefit; and to be acted with zeal for God and compassion to the souls of men. A man may preach every day in the week, and not have his heart engaged once. This hath lost us powerful preaching in the world, and set up, instead of it, quaint orations; for such men never seek after experience in their own hearts: and so it is come to pass, that some men’s preaching, and some men’s not preaching, have lost us the power of what we call the ministry; that though there be twenty or thirty thousand in orders, yet the nation perishes for want of knowledge, and is overwhelmed in all manner of sins, and not delivered from them unto this day.

John Owen on the Lord's Supper (Philippians 3:10)

For some brief tastes of John Owen (1616-1683), his discourses are great, short and also solid and thoughtful. I just read one of his discourses relating to the Lord's Supper, based on Philippians 3:10, particularly about us being conformed to Christ's death. Below are some excerpts...

"That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death."

The cause of the death of Christ was sin... He died for sin; he died for our sin; our iniquities were upon him, and were the cause of all the punishment that befell him...

Our hope and faith is, in and through him, that we shall never die for sin. No mortal man can be made like unto Christ in suffering for sin... our conformity unto the death of Christ with respect unto sin lies in this, — that as he died for sin, so we should die unto sin, — that that sin which he died for should die in us... Here is our conformity to Christ, as he suffered in the flesh, — that we should no longer live to our lusts, nor unto the will of man, but unto the will of God. And, brethren, let me tell you, he who approacheth unto this remembrance of the death of Christ, that hath not laboured, that doth not labour, for conformity to his death in the universal mortification of all sin, runs a hazard to his soul, and puts an affront upon Jesus Christ. O let none of us come in a way of thankfulness to remember the death of Jesus Christ, and bring along with us the murderer whereby he was slain! To harbour with us, and bring along with us to the death of Christ, unmortified lusts and corruptions, such as we do not continually and sincerely endeavour to kill and mortify, is to come and upbraid Christ with his murderer, instead of obtaining any spiritual advantage.

There is no such sermon to teach, mortification of sin, as the commemoration of the death of Christ. It is the greatest outward instruction unto this duty that God hath left unto his church; and, I am persuaded, which he doth most bless to them who are sincere. Do we see Christ evidently crucified before our eyes, his body broken, his blood shed for sin? and is it not of powerful instruction to us to go on to mortify sin? He that hath not learned this, never learned any thing aright from this ordinance, nor did he ever receive any benefit from it...

And I would beg of you all, brethren, that not one of us would pass through or go over this ordinance, this representation of the death of Christ, without a fresh obligation to God to abide more constant and vigorous in the mortification of sin: we all need it.

And lastly; a spiritually beholding of Christ by faith is the means to change us into the image and likeness of Christ. Beholding the death of Christ by faith, as represented to us in this ordinance, is the means to change us into his image and likeness, and make us conformable unto his death, in the death of sin in us.

[Source: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/owen/discourses.i.xvii.html]

Parable of Two Librarians (Samuel T. Logan, Jr)

I thought this "parable of two librarians", was a good illustration of how Christians and churches can approach our role in spreading the knowledge of Jesus -- one a bad example, one a good example.

It is by Samuel T. Logan Jr, in the book, Reformed Means Missional: Following Jesus Into the World...

 

(Maybe someday I will type it out...)

The church was made for God's mission (Christopher J. H. Wright)

"It is not so much that God has a mission for his church in the world; rather, God has a church for his mission in the world. Mission was not made for the church; the church was made for mission--God's mission."

-- Christopher J. H. Wright
(from Foreword in Reformed Means Missional: Following Jesus Into the World)