Tag Archives: doctrine

Deviant Doctrine to Avoid: Jason Westerfield

Leave a reply

**Update April 8, 2010: I’ve closed comments today for two reasons. One, Jason’s removed his book from Google Books. I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he removed it as an admission he doesn’t uphold what he wrote in that book, which brings me to my next point. The other reason I closed comments is because I’ve decided to post answers to frequent objections about my concerns over Westerfield and the New Mystics theology…a theology that is absolutely no different than what he wrote in God Come to Me…a theology Westerfield still affirms…and is dangerous to the church. Here’s the first post: Miracles in the Bible Are NOT Normative.**

This weekend I received a  by . I could only stomach about 16 pages. This was taken from page 3:

For the next several weeks, I stayed home and read the Bible day in and day out. I read it from front to back. I began to observe a very interesting theme throughout the Bible: I saw normal people like myself walking and talking with God. Many of these individuals also had bad resumes; some were even murderers and adulterers. I also read how Abraham was considered to be the father of the Faith. He received visitations from the Lord and angels. He communed with god and had supernatural encounters. After reading about Abraham and others in the Bible, I came to the conclusion that if all of this was happening to them, then it should be happening to me. I knew nothing about church history, doctrine or traditions. All I had was the Bible and the Holy Spirit, and I saw what a normal relationship with God could look like. The Lord would talk to people and work through them in miraculous ways. What surprised me even more than this was the fact that most of them were involved in professions other than “full-time ministry.” So when I read the Bible, what I saw were normal people having real encounters with God.

Westerfield goes onto explain about his trips to heaven, teleportation, encounters with Jesus,  the heavy, palpable blanket of God’s presence, being burned alive by the spirit of God and his ability to dance salsa in public at a restaurant…even when he didn’t have a clue how to dance salsa.

Westerfield claims all this is normative Christian life. You just have to read the Bible to see it. Unfortunately, there couldn’t be anything further from the truth.

Where Westerfield Departs from the Truth

What’s missing in Westerfield’s booklet is any mention of judgment, brokenness, suffering, humility, sorrow for sins, submission to Christ, crucifiction or even Christ’s redeeming work.

Westerfield sweeps aside the story of a holy, just and righteous God redeeming a rebellious people to himself through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In it’s place he suggests that God doesn’t just want us to enjoy the supernatural circus…he wants us to join it!

I can only guess Westerfield glazed over the doctrinal books of the Bible, like Paul’s letters.  

The plain fact is that imitation of Jesus, important though it is for Paul, was swallowed up by something far more important still. Not the example of Jesus, but the redeeming work of Jesus, was the primary thing for Paul.

Bottom line: Jesus is not primarily an example of faith. He is primarily the object of faith. And anybody who devotes his time to getting you to look away from that object of faith is suspect. Even dangerous. My heart is broken.

What do you think? Is prophetic rising star Jason Westerfield misguided, misunderstood or merely manic? More impotantly, is he dangerous?

No related posts.

Quick Study: Reformers on the Trinity

1 Reply

Where you learn what the Reformation added to the discussion about God’s Trinity.

The basic doctrine of the Trinity–one nature and three persons–survived the middle ages and the break with the Roman Catholic Church during the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century.

In fact, the doctrine’s been the same since the controversy was settled in the early church.

So, what did the Reformation add to the discussion about God’s Trinity? Let me show you.

Martin Luther on the Trinity

, the Father of Protestantism, said, “Christ shows forcefully that the Holy Spirit is an actual Being in the Godhead and separate, distinct Person by Himself, one who is not the father or the Son.”

For example, Luther points out what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit in :

But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

Luther said this is the equivalent to saying the Holy Spirit is a distinct person with a particular responsibility. This jives with Augustine’s idea of economy of salvation.

John Calvin on the Trinity

All you need to know: Martin Luther’s contemporary, , agreed with Luther.

Calvin said:

The same holds in the case of the Holy Spirit; for we will immediately prove both that he is God and that he has a separate subsistence from the Father. This, moreover, is not a distinction of essence, which it would be impious to multiply.

Same essence. Different person.

Your Turn

All the Reformation did to the discussion on the Trinity is add a focus to the Holy Spirit. But despite the vigorous activity of people like Luther and Calvin, who devoted and endangered their lives to the defense of the orthodox view of the Trinity, deviant doctrines on the Trinity still emerged…most recently seen in William P. Young’s The Shack.

What ancient heresies do you recognize in today’s ideas about God, the Trinity or Christianity in general? Drop your thoughts in the comments.

**Part of the Thoroughly-Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**

No related posts.

A Thoroughly-Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity

Leave a reply

 

In which I compile all my previous post for a simple, growing, definitive guide of God’s Trinity…darling.

Yes. . .yet another post on the Trinity.

But this time I’m compiling all my previous posts for a simple, growing, definitive guide.

Here’s why I’m doing this.

The Reason Why You Must Study God’s Trinity

Listen: The Trinity is not some pointless piece of theological speculation.

It’s a doctrine that demands attention. Study. Understanding.

Why? Because the Trinity is grounded in the complex human experience of redemption in Christ.

And for more than 1600 years this doctrine has stood as the final test of orthodoxy. It shapes how we understand who God is.

So, let’s explore this often-neglected, beautiful doctrine because if you’re a Christian, you’ll mature in your faith.

If you’re not, well….

10 Woefully Inadequate Views

4 Approaches to the Doctrine of the Trinity

Early Church Fathers, Girl Talk and the Seamless Doctrine of the Trinity

How Ancient Creeds and Dead Men Define Our Beliefs

Medieval Scholars on the Trinity

3 Critical Characteristics of the Trinity You Must Know

Reformers on the Trinity

**Part of The Nature of God series.**

3 Critical Characteristics of the Trinity You Must Know

Leave a reply

Discover the three characteristics of the Trinity you must know if you want to live a vivid, meaningful Christian life.

What do you think: Does the doctrine of the Trinity even matter to your every day life?

I mean, is it just some theological abstraction men in university auditoriums bicker about?

Or does it have a concrete, practical application to your personal and private world?

In a nuthsell, does an understanding of the Trinity even matter?

I’m here to tell you that it does. Especially if you want to live a vivid, meaningful life. Let me explain.

Tim’s Excellent Question

I owe  a huge thanks for raising his hand yesterday during my headlong rush through the history of the doctrine of the Trinity and asking me to slow down and explain how knowledge of the Trinity even made a difference in his everyday life.

So, let me take a pause and explore the historical, personal and relational characteristics of the Trinity and how it, indeed, can make a difference to you.

Historical: Your Flesh and Bones God

As I pointed out yesterday, Augustine was the scholar who originated the idea of the economy of salvation. Yet, Karl Rahner was the scholar who actually articulated it in those words.

The economy of salvation basically says this:

In the three persons of the Trinity, you have God who created people, Christ who redeemed people and the Holy Spirit who  people.

Let me say it another way: God created us, died for us and dwells in us. That, in three over-simplified stages, is the history of redemption.

Therefore, if God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is a historical being, then that means he’s also a personal being. And if He’s a personal being, then He’s perilously close to getting into our business. Just watch.

Personal: Your Private God

So, if this Trinitarian being is a historical being, then we can say three things about Him:

1. He’s unlike other gods who have zero basis in human history.

2. If He was an actual historical figure (Christ–the God man–walked on the Earth), then we can know him.

3. And if we can know Him, then it’s possible to trust  in Him and the things He says.

In fact, as Robert Jensen pointed out, and as our creeds try to do, defining God as the three persons creates theological precision in which we then are very clear about which God we are talking about. The doctrine of the Trinity separates the Christian God from the mob of gods competing in our culture.

And with this precision, we no longer have a fuzzy, speculative being we worship. We have a personal, very private, very clear understanding of God. And if we are seriously personal, private and have a clear understanding about this God, then we can have a relationship with Him.

A relationship that sometimes brings personal risk.

Relational: A Passionate Affair

How do you know if you have a good relationship? A good marriage? Believe it or not, but you have a good marriage when you have conflict. I call it passion.

Sound absurd? Well let me say this: Conflict in a marriage isn’t a sign of trouble. Conflict is a sign of contradictions. Differences, yes. But it’s also a sign of struggles two people are working through to create something more beautiful than if they left them alone.

On the other hand, a lack of conflict or contradiction in a marriage is a sign that someone is withdrawn, isolated and independent. The same is true in your relationship with God.

Here’s why. If you are independent and individualistic and carry on thinking God loves you just the way you are and that He’d never conflict or contradict you…you don’t have a relationship with a person…

You have a  fawning, submissive, impossibly agreeable robot. [Think  here.]

When I say God is historical and personal, I’m also saying He’s relational. I’m saying He cares about us. And he cares enough to want to help us grow into better people. He wants to set us apart from the profane and make us holy. He’s passionate about redeeming His people.

And so the Holy Spirit fits into the Trinity and the history of redemption this way: God created us. Jesus redeemed us. The Holy Spirit changes us.

Over to You

So, without a clear understanding of the Trinity, I do not think you can live a  vivid, meaningful life. . .because if we insist on a hollow, distant knowledge of the three persons of God. . .we end up with a diluted, weak association heavily weighted in our favor. Not a relationship.

What would you rather have: a meaningful relationship with a historical being who wants to give you a glorious life that rests in Him? Or would you rather live a paper-thin, solitary existence forever threatening to combust?

I’d love to hear what you think. [Tim, did I answer your question?]

**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**

God’s Trinity: How Ancient Creeds and Dead Men Define Our Belief

Leave a reply

Two ancient creeds and one council raise an ominous question: Should dead men define what we believe? Find out now.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, we are building a head of steam towards a definitive guide to the doctrine of the Trinity.

I know you so care.

Regardless, far from being a rather pointless piece of theological speculation…the doctrine of the Trinity is grounded directly in the complex human experience of redemption in Christ.

That’s why I saw it as of paramount importance to explore 10 inadequate views, 4 historical approaches and early Church fathers idea of the Trinity.

Today were going take a quick journey back to the 3rd and 4th centuries where the universal church affirmed–through creeds and councils–that the doctrine of the Trinity was normative for all believers.

Then let’s discuss the prickly problem of ancient dead men defining our modern mode of worship.  Let’s go.

Apostle’s Creed: Odd Origins

The –one of the earliest creeds–pointed to the Trinity in its three “I believe” statements: I believe in God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit.

The basic point behind the creed was to defend the Gospel of Christ and refute .

The creeds name comes from the 5th Century legend that after Pentecost, the 12 Apostles dictated part of it. That’s why it’s traditionally divided into twelve sections.

Athanasian Creed: Visualizing the Obscure

The , appearing possibly after the first Council of Nicaea in 325, is the first creed to establish equality in the Trinity:

Nothing is before or after, nothing is greater or less: but all three persons coeternal, together and equal.

Early experiments–were talkin’ 12th Century here– in symbolizing the Trinity as a visual device produced the . You can see the diagram on the knight’s shield in the image above.

The Shield of the Trinity was used as a device from which the Athanasian Creed can be read. Kind of like a . But not really.

Council of Constantinople: Condemning and Confirming

And the great ecumenical  in A. D. 381 declared this statement as a norm for orthodoxy.

It did this by:

1. Confirming the original .

2. Developing a statement to combat the heresy .

3. Expanding the 3rd article of the Nicene creed to establish that the Holy Spirit must be of the same being as God the Father.

4. Condemning Arianism.

What Do You Think?

Do creeds even matter? Are they too formal?  Too limiting? Too stifling?

Besides, “Why should we suppose that early churchmen,” quoting , “who had their own presuppositions and prejudices, were in a position to provide a definitive summary of the faith for all time?”

Or are they important because they define the boundaries within which Christians operate?

I’d love to hear your thoughts. Drop them in the comments. Brutal and all.

**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**

Four Approaches to the Doctrine of the Trinity

Leave a reply

Chances are, you think about God’s Trinity a lot. Are you thinking correctly? Learn why clarity about this doctrine is so important.

Chances are, you think about God’s Trinity a lot. Question is, are you thinking correctly?

Two weeks ago I wrote about 10 inadequate views of God’s Trinity. This week, I want to look at four correct views…

And then I’ll explain why clarity on this doctrine is so important to you.

Cappadocians on the Trinity

This 4th Century family of monks known as the  made major contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity following the Council of Nicaea.

The formula to best describe this approach to the Trinity is “one substance in three persons.” The one indivisible Godhead is common to all three persons of the Trinity.

This approach, however, gives priority to the father, and in doing so, can easily hint at tritheism or modalism.

Karl Barth on the Trinity

Swiss Protestant theologian   is generally regarded as championing the importance of the Trinitarian doctrine after a sustained period of neglect by dogmatic theologians.

Barth argued that sin prohibits man from seeing or hearing the self disclosure of God as redeemer. Therefore, the Holy Spirit’s function is to make this revelation visible to sinful man.

In other words: God reveals Himself through the Son…but sinful man is blind to this revelation without the help of the Holy Spirit.

Karl Rahner on the Trinity

One of the most influential Catholic theologians of the 20th Century, , said the way God reveals himself in the economy of salvation–Father, Son and Holy Spirit–is a disclosure of who he actually is in eternity.

The proper starting point, then, when discussing the Trinity, is our experience of salvation. When we reflect on our salvation experience, we see the Trinity.

Rahner is simply building on what Barth said: Christ is the image of God. But we’ll never see that image unless the Holy Spirit reveals it. That is salvation.

Robert Jenson on the Trinity

In his book –a recommended read if there ever was one– Lutheran theologian  says that the Trinity identifies and isolates the Christian God from rival gods through his historical actions–namely, raising Christ from the dead–as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

In other words, when you use God’s proper name, you are being unquestionably clear about the God you are talking about. This is theological precision. Precious in an age of lax theology.

Why This Is Important to You

I think the number one reason why you should care about the doctrine of the Trinity is this: you can’t truly adore who you don’t know.

We don’t marry strangers. Or even people we kind of know.

When we truly love someone, we want to know everything about that person. So clarity about God deepens our adoration and dependence on Him as we see His beauty in light of our wretchedness.

In fact, refusal to refine our view of God is an act of rebellion. You know you can know God better. What are you going to do about it?

Your Turn

Which of the four approaches helped you see God better? [For me, it was Jensen’s approach.] Do any of these approaches expose any error in your belief or behavior? Do you agree clarity about God is even important? If not, why?

**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**