As you may well know by the limited activity that has (or has not) taken place over the past few months, I think I will not be blogging any longer. Due to time constraints and the desire to be a good and wise steward of my time, I no longer have the time to write (or read much) blogs.

What has led to this conclusion? I came to seminary to grow in the grace and knowledge of Christ and to prepare for teaching and the pastoral ministry. Blogging detracts from this objective. As I have increased the amount of reading and writing (personally as a disciple, husband, and member of a local church; scholastically as a full-time seminary student who hopes to enter into the Ph.D. program in systematic/biblical theology at Southern Seminary; and professionally as a grateful professor’s assistant and also an employee of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood), I have found that I need to narrow the things that I do in order to do them with excellence for the glory of God.

I welcome any and all comments (my email address will remain the same so you email me by making a comment). Thank you for your reading and thoughtful comments over the past two years. Blessings in Christ.

“It was a careful study of the Scriptures that led Alice Linsley to see the light of a complementarian view of gender roles after 18 years as an ordained priest in the liberal Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA).” To read the rest of Jeff Robinson’s fascinating article click here.

May God raise up more people who accurately handle His Word of truth amidst a culture that is hostile towards His wise and good design for the distinct and complementary roles of men and women.

It is much easier to see other’s sins while neglecting our own, which is why we must continually do the work of examining our own hearts to reveal sinful motives and misplaced affections. These questions, written by Paul David Tripp in Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands (p. 316), are excellent to ask because in so doing it moves us to look to God and to trust His precious and magnificent promises which are ours in the finished work of Christ.

1. When do you tend to experience fear, worry or anxiety? (Matthew 6:19-34)
2. Where have you struggled with disappointment? (Proverbs 13:12, 19)
3. In what situation do you struggle with anger? (James 4:1-2; Proverbs 11:23)
4. Where do you encounter problems in relationships? (James 4:1-10)
5. What situations of life have you found particularly difficult? (I Corinthians 10:13-14)
6. Where are your patterns of avoidance? What things do you regularly seek to avoid?
7. Where have you experienced regular problems in your spiritual life or relationship with God? (Psalm 73)
8. Where have you tended to doubt the truths of scripture? (Romans 1:25)
9. What is your agenda for others? What is your definition of a good relationship? What are you expectations for others? What silent demands do you make of the people around you? (James 4:1-2)
10. Where do you struggle with bitterness? (Ephesians 4:31, Proverbs 18:19)
11. Where have you struggled with regret, being tempted to say, “If only…�?
12. What past experiences are hard for you to let go?
13. When do you experience problems in prayer and personal worship? (James 4:3-4)
14. Where do you struggle with envy? What do you tend to covet? (Proverbs 14:30)

Russell Moore has written a great article on adoption and suffering - you can find it here.

The doctrine of the Trinity is a comprehensive doctrine that spans both the Old and New Testaments. Contrary to how many view and preach from the Old Testament, it does not merely contain moral stories. Rather, it provides the framework which prepares the way for the full revelation of the Triune God who acts in history for His redemptive purposes to the praise of His glory (Ephesians 1:3-14). It is only within this rich framework that the doctrine of the Trinity can be understood and appreciated most fully. This doctrine is established upon the biblical-theological framework, which is unfolded through redemptive-history, and most explicitly in the New Testament revelation of Christ and sending of the Holy Spirit. As a theology of the Trinity is constructed from the biblical data, one must be careful to present it within the Bible’s own categories. So, as one moves through the progressive unfolding of God’s revelation, it is clear that the whole canon of Scripture presents a glorious picture of the One God who eternally, fully, equally, and simultaneously exists as three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
In attempting to understand the doctrine of the Trinity, disagreements exist concerning the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments in its presentation. Some discount the OT for its lack of explicit teaching on the three persons in the Godhead. But, as John Feinberg says, “Though the OT is nowhere near as clear as the NT in teaching plurality in the Godhead, the idea is not entirely absent from the OT� (John Feinberg, No One Like Him, 448). Though it is probable that the person living in OT times would not have concluded that the One God of Israel, who repeatedly and emphatically revealed Himself as the only true God (Deut. 6:4-5; 4:32-35; Is. 44:6-8; 45:5-6, 18, 21-22; 46:9; Hosea 13:4; Zech. 14:9) is at the same time three distinct persons – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – it is not impossible to see that there are hints pointing toward a plurality of persons. Feinberg says that “a careful student of the OT could have suspected that it teaches something more about God than just monotheism� (Feinberg, No One Like Him, 448). Herman Bavinck also says, “The Old Testament conveys only an implicit indication of God’s Trinitarian existence: it is [the first part of] the record of the gradually unfolding doctrine of the Trinity. Still, the Old Testament contains – not just in a few isolated texts but especially in the organism of its revelation as a whole – components that are of highest significance for the doctrine of the Trinity� (Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: God and Creation, vol. 2, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend, 261).
Not only could the explicit Trinitarian existence of God have failed to register in the minds of OT readers, but most likely the OT authors would not have understood what would be fully revealed in the NT with the revelation of Jesus Christ and coming of the Holy Spirit. But, as Robert Letham says, “Scripture has a fullness that goes beyond the horizons of the original authorsâ€? (Robert Letham, The Holy Trinity, 20). Adding to this idea he says, “The NT does not refer to everything, but it does give us the principle that the OT contains in seed form what is more fully made known in the NT. On that basis, we may reread the OT, just as we might reread the early chapters of a detective mystery, looking for clues that we missed the first time, but now are given fresh meaning by our knowledge of what comes laterâ€? (Ibid., 20). This can be more fully understood and appreciated in holding to the orthodox view of plenary verbal inspiration, which holds that all Scripture is God’s Word because it is inspired by Him through the agency of men. Every word is fully and perfectly inspired by God such that it says everything that He willed it to say, and at the same time is written by man such that it displays the personality and style of the human author. This way of reading Scripture is demonstrated by Jesus after His resurrection when He walked along the road to Emmaus with His disciples. Luke 24:27 says, “Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.â€? This is also seen when He accused the Jews of claiming to believe in the God of their Scriptures, which had come to them through their prophets, yet at the same time denying the one whom He sent. John 5:45-47 says, “Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” Thus, it would be wise for us to follow the same hermeneutic Jesus used in understanding the relation of the OT to the NT.
This way of reading Scripture should be applied when seeking to understand the whole counsel of God concerning the Trinity. Gerald O’Collins says, “The OT contains, in anticipation, categories used to express and elaborate the Trinity. To put this point negatively, a theology of the Trinity that ignores or plays down the OT can only be radically deficient. Something essential will be missing from what we mean by the Trinity if we ignore the Jewish roots of Jesus and those of His first followers� (Gerald O’Collins, S.J., The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity, 11). Commenting on the mysterious divine personifications in the OT which will be later discussed, Letham says, “The OT personalizations helped lay the groundwork for the eventual leap to persons, for ‘the post-exilic Jews had an idea of plurality within the Godhead’ and so ‘the idea of plurality within unity was already implicit in Jewish theology’� (Letham, The Holy Trinity, 32). It is, therefore, important to see that the OT not only helps in, but is necessary to, understanding that God is both one and three eternally and simultaneously. Bavinck says, “The seeds that developed into the full flower of New Testament trinitarian revelation are already planted in the Old Testament…A threefold divine principle underlies creation as well as re-creation and sustains the entire economy of Old Testament revelation� (Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 256).

My good friend Robbie Sagers from Southern Seminary wrote an excellent review of To Own a Dragon: Reflections on Growing Up Without a Father by Donald Miller and John MacMurray. You can read it here.

1. Ask your husband, “What are your goals for the week?�
2. Ask your husband, “How can I help you accomplish these goals?�
3. Ask your husband, “Is there anything that I can do differently that would make it easier for you?�
4. Be organized with cleaning, grocery shopping, laundry and cooking. As you fulfill your God-given responsibilities, your husband is then free to do his work.
5. Save some of your energy everyday for him.
6. Put him first over children, your parents, friends, job, ladies’ Bible studies, etc.
7. Willingly and cheerfully rearrange your schedule for him when necessary.
8. Talk about him in a positive light to others. Do not slander him at all, even if what you are saying is true.
9. Do whatever you can to make him look good, to accomplish his goals. Some examples are to offer to run errands for him, organize your day to be available to help him with his projects, pray for him and make good suggestions. Give him freedom not to use your suggestion, and do not be offended if he does not follow it.
10. Consider his work (job, goals, hobbies, work for the Lord) as more important than your own.
11. Think of specific ways that you can help him accomplish his goals. Examples are get up early in the mornings to help him get off to work having had a good breakfast, take care in recording telephone messages for him, anticipate any needs he may have in order to attain a specific goal, and keep careful records of money spent to keep up with the budget.
12. Consider the things that you are involved in. How do they glorify your husband? Ask his guidance.
13. Be warm and gracious to his family and friends. Make your commitment to him obvious to them.
14. Do and say things that build him up instead of tear him down.
15. Dress and apply your makeup in an attractive manner that is pleasing to your husband.
16. When your husband sins, reprove him privately and gently, always giving him hope and pointing him to the Lord.
17. Encourage him to use his spiritual gifts in ministry
18. Realize that just as God is glorified when man obeys Him, your husband is glorified when you obey your husband.

*Taken from The Excellent Wife by Martha Peace

There is a growing movement among those who would call themselves evangelical Christians that is seeking to reconstruct the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, particularly concerning the masculine God-language God uses to name Himself in His Word. This doctrine was formulated and agreed upon by the Church both at the Council of Nicea in AD 325 (where Christ was the concern) and the Council of Constantinople in AD 381 (where the Holy Spirit was the concern). It can be summed up nicely (with help from Augustine) in saying, “The doctrine of the Trinity affirms that God’s whole and undivided essence belongs equally, eternally, simultaneously, and fully to each of the three distinct Persons of the Godhead� – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Bruce A. Ware, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles, and Relevance, 41). Equally (contra Arianism or subordinationism, and also Jehovah’s Witness), eternally (contra the idea that God’s nature is created), simultaneously (contra Modalism, or the idea that only one person exists at one point in time, i.e. Father in the OT, Son prior to Pentecost, and Spirit thereafter; this is also seen in Oneness Pentecostals), and fully (contra the idea that God exists as three parts, such as three pieces of a pie, rather than each person being fully God in Himself; if you really want to know, the idea of the perichoresis, or mutual indwelling, and Calvin’s idea of autotheos help in understanding this more fully) are crucial terms for clarification. This may seem tedious, but it is important if one wants to understand the Trinity truthfully as God has revealed Himself.

Many would be shocked and saddened to know that this masculine naming of God is being challenged and reformulated currently in feminism, and it also has evangelical feminists (egalitarians) scratching their heads as the culture becomes more hostile toward the biblical idea that God has designed men and women differently (although both are created in the image of God and therefore have equal dignity and value before Him, as complementarians hold) and has assigned different roles for them in the home and in the church for His glory and their good. (To their credit, egalitarians have not changed God’s name yet, but they sure do not have a valid answer as to why God has freely chosen to name Himself in masculine terms.) Instead of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, God’s self-revealed and self-given name is being changed to Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier.

At first this might not raise the hairs on the back of one’s neck, but the more one thinks through the implications of this name in light of Scripture the more one sees the danger that lurks behind it. Is the Father alone the Creator and the Son or Spirit have no participation in it? What about Genesis 1:1-2, Psalm 33:6, John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16-17, and Hebrews 1:1-3? The lines are not so clear as these passages clearly demonstrate the full participation and roles (yes, I said roles!) of both the Son and Spirit in the creation ex nihilo of the universe. Is the Son alone the Redeemer? What about Eph. 1:1-14 where the whole Godhead is involved in our redemption? The Father planned it according to His sovereign will, the Son effectively accomplished it through His death and resurrection, and the Spirit applies it to the individual believer through regeneration. What about the Holy Spirit as Sanctifier? Do the Father and Son have no participation in the believer’s sanctification? What about Jesus in John 17:17 praying to the Father that He might sanctify them in truth? Or 1 Thessalonians 5:23 where Paul prays that the God of peace (most likely the Father) may sanctify them entirely? There is much more to be said concerning the problems with this renaming of God, which is why this will be the focus of future entries.

What are your thoughts concerning this issue?

Well, it’s official: Another semester has come and gone leaving me in its wake to think and reflect upon all that I have learned. How thankful we are for this wonderful season to study, prepare, and be sanctified at Southern Seminary, for it is such a joy to be able to drink deeply of glorious truths from men who the Lord has brought here to teach. I am particularly thankful for the class on the Doctrine of the Trinity with Dr. Bruce Ware. He is a brilliant and godly man who not only loves and contends for the truth where it is being attacked (such as God’s exhaustive foreknowledge, His providence, and the Trinity), but best of all he models what it means and looks like to know God in his own life, marriage, and family. In sitting under his teaching in class, at church, and in working for him, it has been such a blessing to see his passion and humility as they truly demonstrate his confidence in the meticulous providence of God (contra Open Theism and Arminianism). O how we need men in our churches and families who feel the weight of the glory and splendor of God! This is truly an answer to much prayer over the years and I am deeply thankful to our great God and Savior for bringing us here at this time.

Lord-willing, I hope to write about some things that I learned through this class on the Trinity. It has been such a blessing to be immersed the past four months in reading and thinking on our great God (singular) who equally, eternally, fully, and simultaneously exists as three distinct persons (plural) – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Augustine’s definition). One thing in particular that I have been thinking about is how Feminism is seeking to revise the orthodox definition of the Trinity in order to fit their own agenda. I look forward to writing about this. Until then, may God our Father richly bless you through the person and work of his Son Jesus Christ by his Holy Spirit.

I am immersed in finals, but alas (!), I will re-emerge; and when I do, I am committed to blog like I have never blogged before. Until then…