Lecture 3: Revelation 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Revelation & Natural Theology←← Question

How do we know God?← What is revelation?

“uncovering,” “unveiling,” “disclosure”o apocolypse – Greeko means the knowledge of God or revealing of God (burning

bush, Saul’s meeting on road to Damascus etc)o we have to be TOLD, we can’t know aside from thiso self-disclosure, God makes God known

FORMS OF REVELATIONo Doctrine

Use our theology to come to conclusions about God (Carl F. H. Henry, J. I. Packer)

Information about the nature of God Propositional to nature - Packer Turn to scripture to develop doctrine, or to scripture &

tradition etc Lindbeck says that God is not info or proposition

o God’s personal presence Not info, but in a personal encounter Buber – Jewish theologian – “I and Thou” = encounter is

not an “it”, it is a “thou” Brunner – developed idea in Christian sense

Dialectical theologian – early – mid 20th C, distinction between God & creator

o Experience

Not encounter, but inward reflection Schleiermacher & Ritschl

o History open to everyone, God’s self-revelation through Christ

was at a point in history, and God says what will be in the future

not limited to history of Bible Pannenberg

o Event Dependent upon God’s action, through Christ and

scripture Barth

← Kinds of Revelation GENERAL REVELATION

o God can be/is known through created worldo Divine attributes can be discerned by reflecting on natural

worldo General? Open to everyone, generally available, provides

general info about Godo If God has created the world, then it should bear the mark of

God’s handiworko Thomas Aquinas (Thomist theologians)

“Summa Contrea Gentiles” – importance of gen. rev. Fundamental similarity between creation and creator Analogia Entis – analogy of being (between God and

nature)o John Calvin

“Institutes” we know God subjectively – seed of religion or sense of

divinity, everyone has a concept of God objectively – through creation the created world as “theater of God’s glory”

So what does that mean? Where in creation can we know God?o Humanity:

Augustine – says it’s the height of creation. Internal composition.

Vestigium Trinitatis – vestige, trace, of the trinity Triads or psychological trinity (memory, understanding,

will, or love knowledge, __)o Order:

Things function, it’s not chaotic – relates science & theology

o Beauty Reflects God’s nature Augustine & Edwards – not just “pretty” but things in

relation to one another Viladesau and David Bentley Hart are contemporary

theologianso GR affirms that God make be known by revelation of the

natural world SPECIAL REVELATION

o Self disclosure of God for the purpose of human historyo More direct, specific formo God must reveal God’s self BEYOND the natural world

1st through JC, 2nd through scriptureo Calvin:

Knowledge, but is corrupted by our sin Can’t attain who or what sort of being God is It is possible to see God through nature, but we need

special “spectacles” Requires inner testimony of HS

“Accommodation” – helps us understand how God accommodates himself to us, like talking to a baby

“THE TWO BOOKS OF REVELTION”

o nature and scripture← Natural Theology

Barth vs Brunneo Barth

God reveals himself, he reveals himself through himself, Revelation is an event God is the subject of revelation. Only God can reveal

God God is the object of revelation, because he is the one

who gets known through revelation Economic God (God as known or revealed in

economy of world) = immanent (God in God’s own life, infinite, holy, triune). They are one in the same.

God is real but he remains hidden (Augustine, Luther, Pascal agree)

Even in the event of revelation, God remains hidden.

God has to assume human flesh (JC), words of scripture – he veils himself. But in the veiling, he is actually known. You still get to know the true God

JC is revelation Place of Scripture? – testimony to the revelation.

What is natural theology? What is it? Is it possible?o Same thing as Gen. Rev.o Or an attempt to know God apart from revelationo Not the same as theology of natureo Barth is very opposed to ito Brunner published a book called “Nature and Grace” claiming

that we had to find our way back to natural theology by recognizing the “point of contact” that exists between God and humanity (imago dei)

o Barth responded (by this time they weren’t friends anymore) with a book called “Nein!” – there is no point of contact, for God to be revealed it is completely his own action

no capacity for humans to know God on their now, no analogia entis (no analogy of being)

o Calvin: “There has been no region since the beginning of the world, no city, no home, that could exist without religion; this fact in itself points to a sense of divinity inscribed in the hearts of all people.” And “There are innumerable witnesses in heaven and on earth that declare the wonders of his wisdom”

o Song: Fairest Lord Jesus – General and Special Rev.

Scripture 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Gruenewald painting

Why is John the Baptist in the picture when he’s dead?o Points to Christ as fulfillment of promise – he must increase, I

must decrease←←What is Scripture?

Defined: o Scripture is the collection of inspired, canonical text that

serves as the final authority for all matters of Christian faith and practice

o 66 books, 39 OT, 27 NT The fixing of the canon

o “canon” comes from Greek meaning “rule,” “norm,” or “yardstick”

o first version with 66 books was in 367, then it was deemed close

a process of recognition rather than imposition – they recognized that these texts had authority, they didn’t make some texts have authority

apostolic authorship helped something be canonizedo non-canon are apocryphl or non-canonical

Catholic and Orthodox use these, but they vary between churches

The relationship between OT and NTo What to do with OT?

Rejection: Marcionism Believed that OT showed different God, so it

couldn’t be authoritarian to Christians Continuity

Augustine: complete harmony Calvin: same God, same divine will, OT witnesses

to Christ by anticipation Distinction

Emphasizes that something new has come about

NT fulfils the OT Augustine: the veil over OT has been removed,

“The NT is hidden in the Old; the Old is made accessible by the New”

← The Inspiration of Scripture Theopneustos, Greek for “God breathed” or “God inspired”

o 2 Tim 3:16 Aspects of inspiration:

o Verbal inspiration Words are God’s words, God’s speech to us

o Plenary inspiration All of it is inspired by God, not just “words”

Theories of Inspirationo Divine dictation to human authors

Rigid approach – God dictated every word, secretaries who recorded words basically

o Divine words expressed through human authors Different styles, intentions, inspired by God, written by

human authorso Artistic expression

Aesthetic aspect, emphasis more on human. It is inspired by relies on human creative impulse which is argued by Christian (does the HS inspire art?)

← The authority of Scripture Scripture is the first and final authority on all matters of Christian

faith and practice It is the norm against which things are practiced Scripture receives authority

o Didn’t create it on its own, receives it from God and Christ Scripture provides authority

o For proclaimation, for the church,

Avoid bibliolatryo Don’t worship scripture

← The Nature of Scripture Inerrancy

o Scripture is without error; it is completely true and totally trustworthy in everything it affirms and denies, including issues of history and science

Applies to original documents only Doesn’t refer to our understanding Speech act theory –

Infallibilityo Scripture is unfailing in matters of faith and practice; it is

incapable of failing to accomplish its purpose, even if it has minor errors

Catholics say the pope is infallible The Word of God

o Barth’s doctrine of scripture (threefold, scripture testifies to Christ who testifies to God). Scripture becomes the word of God – it is a witness to JC and God

← The interpretation of Scripture Acknoledgment of the illumination of the HS

o HS allows us to interpreto “The “inner testimony” of the HS is needed for our

understanding of scripture” – Calvino Alexandian School vs Antiochene School

Alex – allegorical – looking for deeper meaning, spiritual meaning

Antioc – literal, historicalo Quadriga

Four senses, four meaning of scripture Literal – face value Allegorical – something deeper, hidden

Moral or tropological – what do they mean for us ethically?

Anagogical – what Christians should hope foro Typology

Links between people/place/events in OT with NT (OT = type, NT = antitype)

“letter” vs “spirit” (Erasmus of Rotterdam) humanist who wanted to go back to original

translations similar to allegorical, can be literal or allegorical

o Demythoogization (Rudolf Bultmann)o By the church, by the individual, by sripture

Church = roman catholic position, protestants agree but not that the only authority is within the church

Individual = anyone can come and should be able to understand matters of salvation. Perspicuity

Scripture = One part of scripture can clarify another part of scripture aka the analogy of scripture/faith

o In context Not only our context, but also

Understanding the Doctrine of God & Trinity 3/9/09 11:17 AM

← shamrock – 1 or 3 leaves? How can you understand the trinity if you can’t understand this leaf? – St Patrick←← Does God exist?← What is God’s nature?←← DOCTRINE OF GOD← Existence

God is. He does exist. = Aseity (God exists on God’s own) Being God means existing

← Can it be proved? Anselm

o Ontological argument (concerns being, existing)o Wrote from a perspective of faitho Says that “God is that than which nothing greater can be

thought” This entails that God exists He has to be better than our idea – reality is greater

than idea If God only exists in human mind, then he is not the

greatest possible being To exist is more perfect than not existing

Guaniloo Idea doesn’t necessarily entail existence

Kant is on Guanilo’s side Anselm

o God is in another category o God is not the greatest thing YOU can think of, but nothing

greater can be thought

Could it be evangelism tool? God is perfect, same as Judaism and Islamic God

Descartes uses Anselm’s argument Aquinas

o “Five Ways”o analogy of being

1) Motion/Change things are in motion, things don’t move or change

on their own must have been started/change by someone infinite progression? Must be prime, unmoved mover, unchanging

changer 2) Causation/Cosmological

effects and causes causes must come from first cause uncaused cause

3) Contingency some things that don’t have to be here (us) not everything can be contingent, there must be

some things that are necessary necessary

4) Gradation/Perfection what is good, true, beautiful some things are better, some are more beautiful sense of better or worse must be something that is ultimately good, true,

beautiful -> perfect perfect being

5) Design/Teleological things have order, they are intelligently designed some intention, moving towards goal or purpose intentional designer

links to Paley’s watch analogy William of Ockham

o This doesn’t necessarily show that this is the one triune God of the Christian faith

o Don’t add anything to principlal Nomalist Position

o Rejection of universals←← DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY← “If you can understand it, it’s not God”← Fundamental to Christian faith

Distinctively Christiano To faithfully describe God

Scripturalo “trinity” doesn’t exist in the bible, but the idea is thoroughly

scriptural/biblical Doxological

o Affirms in praise/worship of Godo Used in sacramental life of church also

← Scriptural Foundations One

o God is one Deut 6, Mark 12, Eph 4

Triune OT & NTo Gen 1:26 (plural form), Gen 18:1-15 (3 men appear to

Abraham, he was visited by the Lord), Is 48:16o 3 major personifications of God: Wisdom/Word Ps 147, Is

55:11/Spirito Baptism of Jesus, reveals presence of all 3 members of triune

God (spirit as dove, voice of God)o Matt 28:19o 2 Cor 13:14 – Graceo John 10/14 – relationship between JC & Father

← Historical Irenaeus

o Talked about 3 persons of God working in the economy of salvation

Tertulliano First person to say trinityo Came up with term person and substanceo Distinct but not divided

← Stages of Affirming the Trinity 1) Divinity of Christ

o First thing that had to be affirmed to even look into the trinityo Affirmed as being divine – Athanasiuso Nicaea was first to council to affirm Christ’s divinity (325)o Homoousious – means they are of the same substance

2) Divinity of Holy Spirito Cappadocians – 3 theologians in 4th C: Basil the Great,

Gregory of Nyssa (brother of Basil), Gregory of Nazianzus Spirit is Holy and divine Is holy, sanctifies and renews humanity, spirit is

included is baptismal formula

o Constantinople (381) Nicene creed affirms more to do with HS 3) Doctrine of the Trinity

o God is one substance (ousia), three persons (hypostasis) Substance – essence, divine nature, something shared

between three memberso God is not impersonal or distant, he is personalo God exists in relation – relationship between the three

persons – but also in perfect communion, community, fellowship

o Perichoresis – mutually indwelling, mutual interpenetration, although distinct, they share in the life of the other two – the divine dance

o Circumincession – same as aboveo God exists in action – all of his actions are united, external

actions are indivisible (creator, redeemer, sustainer – all 3 do all 3)

o Doctrine of appropriations Although it is true that external actions are indivisible,

there is still some distinctions between the persono Models of the trinity

Eastern WesternEmphasizes distinctiveness of 3 persons

Emphasizes oneness of God

Father begets/generates the sonThe son proceeds from the father (procession)Father breathes/spirates the HS

HS proceeds from the Father “and the Son” – Filioque controversy

Eastern Weaknesses and Benefits - What is the relationship between HS & Son in

Eastern? + Father is seen as one source, whereas there are

two sources in Western idea Western Weaknesses and Benefits

- subordination, downplays Holy Spirit, - how is Jesus conceived by HS in either model?

o Economic and Immanent trinity Economic – God known in the relationship in the world –

economy of salvation Immanent – God within God’s own inner life

Immanent God is first cause, but we know about it from the economic trinity

Economic and Immanent should be the same

The Triune God & Divine Attributes 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Finishing Lecture 5

Economic vs immanent trinityo Ontological = beingo Epistemological – knowing

Trinitarian anaologieso Psychological – Augustine

Vestigan trinitatis – within humanity Threefold relationship – mind, knowledge, love, or

memory, understanding, will Love – who is love (F), the beloved (S), the love

between them (HS)o Social

Richar of St Victor & Moltmann Understands God in terms of relationships

between trinity Society of relations, community within 3 members Basis of liberation theology – seek justice because

of God’s divine interactions F, S, HS is Proper Name for God. (God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob –

God self identifies) Trinitarian Heresies

o Modalism/Sabellianism Three separate manifestations of one God, three

“Modes” Overstep bounds and monarchianism happens – they do

it to try and focus on oneness of God 2 kinds of modalism:

Chronological God is 3 modes of being in succession

(different periods of time) Functional

Each member performs specific action – God as creator, Jesus as redeemer, Spirit is sanctifier

Not just ascribing, but saying that they are the ONLY one involved in that act

“Modes of Being” – Seinsweise – Barth is not a modalisto Tritheism

Overemphasizes 3ness of God – three distinct Gods, essences

o Subordinationism Ranks the three persons of trinity – demotes one

member below another←← LECTURE 6 – DIVINE ATTRIBUTES←← not an exhaustive list←← Absolute Attributes – determined by via negative – say what he is by saying what his is not (assoc. by immanent trinity)

Aseity – God exists on God’s own Simplicity – God is absolutely unified, God is one, doesn’t possess

attributes, but he IS these things (he’s not wise, he is wisdom), all his actions are united, does not negate doctrine of trinity

Eternity – he exists eternally (atemporal – outside time, or temporal – within time, no beginning no end) God can exist atemporally but act temporally. All of time is immediately present to God. Simultaneity of time.

Infinity – Omnipotence – all powerful. Almighty. God can do anything. God

can do anything that doesn’t involve illogical contradiction. Can God sin? No – contrary to God’s nature. Can God choose not to create the world.

Omniscience – Ps 139 Omnipresense – Ps 23, 129 Immutability – God does not change or develop, Num 23:19, Mal

3:6, Heb 13:8, Jam 1:17, - he would have either improved or become less, but if he improved then he’s obviously not perfect beforehand

o Process theology – reality is dynamic, God is involved, so God is involved in ongoing dynamic of world

o Hartshorne, Spinoza, Whiteheado OT God having changed his mind

Impassibility – God does not suffer, God possesses apatheia (no pathos, no feeling). The divine nature is not affected by pain and suffering of humanity. Rejects patripassianism (modalist position) – father suffering – and theopaschitism (one of the trinity was crucified) – god suffers. Deriviative of immutability, if you suffer you change somehow,

← Relative Attributes – source of something, primary value of something we have (economic trinity). God is the cause of the immanence, primary example of something.

Holiness – notion that God is set apart, completely different, otherness, transcendence, purity (Barth – infinite qualitative distinction)

Goodness Mercy – Ps 103, Luk 6:36 Justice – Is 30, Is 61 Patience Wisdom – Prov 1:20 Righteousness – gracious and righteous Ps 116 Perfection – Ps 5:48 Beauty – Ps 27:4, Aquainas thought there were 3 aspects to beauty

– integrity, proportion (harmony between parts), clarity (splendor, wow factor). Jon Edwards – beauty in terms of creation. Barth – relation to God’s glory, manifestation of glory

Trustworthiness – true and trustworthy Freedom – 1 Cor 3, Love – 1 John 4. Barth combines Freedom and love. The one who

loves in freedom. ← The Scandal of Particularity

If JC is God, how can he be omnipresent, omniscient, etc etc. 3.33

o Summarize Moltmann God suffered through the giving of his son Jesus suffered by being giving up – separation Patripassianism – suffering of Father Theopaschitism – suffering of God HS as bond of love that can’t be part of relationship

when God and Christ are separated Discussion: God seems to suffering because suffering is part

of love

Unity of suffering – not Christ separated from son Tries to avoid Patripassianism – different ways in

which three persons suffer Spirit is the spirit of abandonment – mysteriously

holds father and son together in abandonment Triune God & Death of Christ – how is triune God held

together? JC is affirmed of being of human and divine – yes

he suffered, but only in his human nature, not in divine nature. Two natures are united, but distinct natures.

Moltmann says it’s important that God suffers with us (motivation: context of World Wars. Consequence: if suffering is divine attribute, does that mean suffering is in heaven? ). Active suffering, will of God.

Election 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Defined: refers to God choosing, exercising divine will in choosing individual or people←← God chooses people for specific tasks

Chosing of Samuel, David for King← God chooses individuals for salvation

Many invited, few chosen Sheep and goats (Matt 5)

← God chooses a people or community Israel Deut 7,

← Divine foreknowledge & Omniscience Eternity Foreknowledge – knows everything that will happen Three interpretations

o 1) Calvinist Ex 11:9 Rom 9:21-24

o 2) Arminianism – thinks it denies free will, yes God foreknows, but humans exercise free will. He determines some things, but leaves other things up to our choice. Line between foreknowledge and foreordains.

2.5) Middle Knowledge/Molinism – God has control of future, but he sees all the things and then chooses one.

o 3) Open Theism – God knows broad outlines, but doesn’t know details. Different definition of omniscience.

Jesus didn’t know time or place of end times If God knew of sin, why did he create Adam?

←← Arminianism

Definition of Arminianism

o God knows our choices, but they’re still choiceso Doesn’t deny God’s knowledge

How can it not be based on things you do, and whether you do them everyday?

Bible passageo John 3:16o 2 Pet 3:9o OT one…

Questions for other groupso Calvinists:o If God wants everyone to be saved, how can he chose people

to go to hell?o If it’s not free will, how can we truly love God without it being

a robotic love?o Open Theists:o Are there an infinite possibilities open for people, instead of

just for God?o Where’s the line between outlining the details? Is an

individuals salvation outlined?o Doesn’t God care about little particulars?

←← Predestination

Augustine – Pelagianism controversy, argues that humanity is saved by good works, merit apart from divine grace. Humanity has a complete free will (Tertullian made up term free will)

o Free will not affected by the fall/sino Perfection is possible for humanityo Born sinless, only sin through deliberate actso Justification comes by merits, o Doctrine of sin & grace – Augustine upholds grace, and free

willo Says free will is weakened and corrupted by sin that we can’t

not sin

o Luther says later about the “rider on two horses”o Aug – completely on God’s grace which is a gifto If grace is a gift, it can be given or not giveno Everyone is undeserving, is it given to some. Grace if

particular, not universalo Doesn’t mean that god withholds gift from some. Some say it

logically implies that. He says it’s a positive thing. Actively gives gift

What would Augustine say to potter using some pots for bad

Calvino Blown out of proportion in his theologyo Predestination demonstrates god’s sovereignty, omnipotence,

gloryo How can some people believe and other not if God is

sovereign? God has predestined some to eternal life and

predestined others to eternal damnation Double predestination Horrible, terrible

o Distinguishes between foreknowledge and predestination, but they’re not connected

Not dependent on things you’re going to do, but he just decides the elect

o Point of prayer for Calvinism: prayer is not so we can change God’s mind, but so God can change us.

o Affirms sovereign will of God, determined by exergesis of scripture and knowledge of the world

Beza – reverted it, began with double predestination, saw what that meant for everything else

o Did God elect people before or after the fall? Supralapsarian – god elected them before the fall (Beza

agrees). Object of election is humanity prior to the fall. Infralapsarian/sublap… - god elected people after fall.

Election follows fall. God’s decision to be incarnate in Christ was a response (Turrettini)

Arminianismo Depends on what you do in the future. His predestination

depends on his foreknowledgeo He knows whether you will accept Christ, and on that basis he

predestines someo Emphasizes individual freely accepting or rejecting the gifto Loves all, wants to save all, but salvation freely choseno What about salvation being dependent on what you do?

Affirm that we can’t choose god ultimately on our own, we require God’s prevenient grace (work of HS in hearts of all people as they come to accept Christ)

Prevenient grace is not denied by Calvinists, but it means slightly different things

Work of HS in all people, enables people to say yes, but doesn’t require

Spirit is at work in sustaining you in thato If you can freely choose it, you can freely lose it

Bartho Same tradition as Calvin, doesn’t agree with double

predestinationo Election does not primarily concern God’s eternal decrees

concerning salvation but instead JC is both electing God and the elected Man

Election is the sum of the gospel – it reveals/indicates what Christ did for us in being the elected God and man

Christ is subject of election, and the object (human) of election

Christ became the elect, and he is also the rejected We can only see what an elect person is in JC, and we

can only see what rejected is in JC Sort of double predestination, but both aspects refer to

JC Election becomes sum of gospel because God is God for

uso Scriptural?

1 peter 1:20

1 Pet 2:4-5o Universalism?

Is Christ only one rejected? Salvation through Christ Is Christ only one rejected? Limited atonement – Jesus only died for some – he

denies thisChrist specific role -

Lecture 8 - Creation 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Art

Can show what God is NOT Frankenstein, juxtaposing creation

←← Creation

Apostles creed affirms that God is creator of the heavens and earth Theism – God exists, is creator

o Opposes other world views such as naturalism/metaphysical materialism, pantheism, panentheism

Scriptureo Major theme of OT (Gen 1-2)o Gen 1 is 6 days of creation. Gen 2 is Adam and Eveo Ps 95:4-6, 104:24, Job 38:4

Creedso The Apostles “creator”, The Nicene “maker”

← Doctrine of Creation Creation is a free act of triune God

o It is an act. God is the subject of creation.o It is a free act of God. He would still be God even if he didn’t

create the world. o It is a free act of the triune God. External actions of trinity are

indivisible. Creation could be primarily prescribed to God, but not solely to God.

JC in creation: John 1:10, John 8:58, Col 1:16-17, Heb 1:2 HS in creation: Gen 1:2, Ps 104

o God didn’t create himself, or the Son or HS. Creator/creation distinction

o Affirms that God remains transcendent or other from the universe

o Ps 24:1 – still belongs to God. Opposes pantheism – everything is God/divine

God’s authority over, independence from creationo Exercises complete lordshipo Everything is dependent on God, God is independent

Opposes panentheism – everything is in God. Both god and world are eternal. God’s being includes entire universe. God’s affected by universe – God’s dependent upon creation for who he is.

Creation takes place “out of nothing” (creatio ex nihilo)o Opposes creation out of pre-existent matter (Origen, Justin

Martyr) If God created out of something, then other material

was eternal. Takes away creations dependence on God

o Demiurge and Gnosticism (creation of preexisting matter, negative view of creation)

Creation is goodo 5x in narrative

opposes dualism: Gnosticism (saw spiritual as good, material as evil), Manichaeism (later form on Gnosticism, influenced young Augustine.

o It is good, but not divine Lead to other religions (star worship etc)

o Creation is good, but it is no longer perfect Fallen, needs redemption God is not responsible for evil

o Humanity is created in the image of God (imago Dei) Only thing that’s not good is that Adam is alone

The creating God is the redeeming and recreating Godo Opposes deism (affirms creator, denies involvement in world

today - clock)o Karl Barth: Creation is “the exteral basis of the covenant”. The

covenant is “the internal basis of creation”

← Models of Creation Emanation: radiates out, overflows light and heat. Creation just

overflows out of who God is. o It’s not deliberate, not apart from him, makes it impersonal

Construction/Formationo Potter & Clay Rom 9:21o Denies creation ex nihilo

Artistic Expressiono Free choiceo Jonathon Edwards

← Theories of Creation Creationism

o Brought into existence in present form by direct, creating act of God

o Opposes evolutionary theoryo Young Earth Creationism:

Interprets Genesis literally “yom” = day = 24 hrs Prior to Adam and Eve’s sin, there is no death, no apple

dies etco Old earth creationism:

Indefinite period of time Sun wasn’t created till 4th day Vegetation on 3rd day, so it couldn’t grow, so it can’t be

read literally. Too much happened in one 24 hr day. God’s time isn’t like our time Science shouldn’t be ignored – micro evolution instead

of macro evolutiono Restoration

God created the world, is was void, was Creation of one world, destruction and restoration of

another worldo Literary framework view

Not supposed to be scientific. Just to tell that God created the world. ONE God. No existence of pre-existing material

Intelligent designo Complexity of world, God created ito Doesn’t deny evolution, but does see purpose

Evolutionary theismo Christian doctrine and evolution are compatible. o God initiates process that leads to humanity. o Process theology.

Lecture 10 - Humanity 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Theological anthropology

Creatureo 1) Dependent upon God for existenceo 2) God affirms humanities special place/role in creationo Difference between creator and humanityo God makes convenant throughout humanityo Ps 8 – why does God care for us?

Image of Godo Imago deio Concept of image of God: Gen 1:26-7. Gen 5:1-3. Gen 9:6. NT:

James 3:9. o Physical likeness

God’s hand, mouth, foot etc – anthropomorphic explanations.

Unsatisfactory explanation of image of Godo Structural/substantival

A particular attribute within humanity Equated with soul (Calvin) Attribute: reason – we have the capacity for thought

unlike other creatures (Aquinas, Augustine) – intellectual soul, ability to know God

Attribute: will/volition – capable of deciding/choosing things

Attribute: creativity – Dorothy Sayers The Mind of the Maker. Desire and ability to make things – God’s attributes in Genesis. Idea (overall idea), Energy (Image that represents), Power (how people interact with it) = Father, Son, Spirit

But what about someone who can’t create, can’t reason, etc? These are not sufficient because ALL are made in image of God.

o Functional Dominion over creation – stewardship

o Relational Relationship

Humanity is created in image of triune God 3 person exist in perfect relationship

humanity was made for relationship with God some say: inherent with who we are others say: dependent upon God’s action – not

intrinsically capable. Humanity is made to have relationship with each other

Male/female Hierarchy Inherent hierarchy within trinity, Eve made

from Adam, woman as reflection of man Neighbor, friend, etc

Simone Weil – love of neighbor as essential equality between people

Humanity was made for relationship with creation Existed in peace Vegetarian

o Eschatological Doctrine of end times Imago dei is a goal, our destiny, we grow into it Imago Christi – image of Christ, Rom 8:29, 2 Cor 3:18,

Phil 3:21, Eph 4:22-24, Col 3:9-11 Formed in image of Christ, putting on new self of Christ Irenaeus. Augustine. Longing and desire for God Image/likeness

Similtudo dei Tritullian said that the image is humanities form

but likeness is humanities eternal destiny Some say they express the same thing

State of Imago Deio Completely destroyed by sin (Luther)o Corrupted but not totally destroyed (Calvin)o Intact (barth)

Imago dei is relationship, so God’s relationship with humanity continues despite sin

Image is not something we possess/own, so we can’t lose it

Brunner Formal side (OT) – human Material side (NT) – proper response

Can lose imago dei in the second sense Having faith/living in Christ Human vs truly human

Christ is the image of Godo He is the true image, he’s whose image we grow into

2 Cor 4:4, Col 1:14o he defines what it means to be humano Christ restores the image of God in humanity

Luther, Brunner, Calvin Christocentric/Christological Anthropology

Humanity’s Constitutiono Our makeup.o 1) monisitic view

humanity is single, undivided parts body, soul, spirit, heart = one thing salvation is resurrection of the flesh

o 2) dichotomist humanity is a body and a soul humanity has an embodied experience humanity is more – so everything else goes under “soul”

– scripture distinguishes it from the body. It is equivalent with spirit (Calvin) – soul is immortal

o 3) trichotomist body, soul, spirit – 3 parts that constitute humanitynot always interchangeable 1 Thes 5:23

Sin & The Fall 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Hamartology – doctrine of sin

← What is sin? State

o A state in which humanity finds itself – state of being separated from God

o Doctrine of original sino Sin characterized as separation – salvation as atonement

Captivity and liberation Guilt and forgiveness Illness and health Lost and found Condemnation and vindication

o Literary expression – Milton’s Paradise Lost Action

o An action by humanity, we undertake it. It is an immoral act – abuse of free will

o Opposition to God’s law or will Humanity is responsible

o Opposition to God’s grace Deny our need for it, refuse to live in it

o Replacing God Images, idolatry, worshiping anything other than God

o Turning to self Turn from God to self (incurvatus in se) – turned/curved

in on ones self Impossible possibility – self contradictory

o Elevating the self

Pride Seek self-fulfillment

o Eastern perspective – born without sin, not sinful until they do something or don’t do something = sin as action

o Western – more a state← Origin of Sin

Satan Adam’s sin

o The fact that Adam sinned means that all born after Adam are born under sin

o Imputation of Adam’s sin to the rest of humanityo Rom 5:19

Parents to children Original sin

o Description of sinful human conditiono Depravity of human natureo Alienation from god when all people are born – all are captive

to sino Augustine – originally blameless, chose to sin,

Evil doesn’t exist, it is privation of good Wrong choice is deficiency Human nature now is corrupted and effected Free will is corrupted Ps 51:5

o Neibuhr – sin is necessary/inevitable but we are still responsible

← Nature of Sin Corporate

o Applies to all people Individual

o Find themselves in sinful state and are responsible for sinful actions

o “actual sins” Radical

o Every aspect of human life is affected by sino Every aspect of humanity – every part of us

← Consequences of sin Separation from God

o No more relationship, fellowship brokeno Gen 3:23

Breaking of other relationshipso Husband/wife – husband ruling over wifeo Broken between brothers (cain/abel)o Creation - toil for foodo Image dei – lost or corruptedo Death – prior to Adam’s sin, there was no death. Created for

perfection and immortality – original righteousness. Others say part of limitation to be creature

← God’s remedy Separation -> atonement

o At one ment Christ who is without sin

o He became sin for uso He removes sin, takes away sin of the world

o Simil iustus et peccator (Luther) justified and sinful at the same time

Order of divineo When did election take place?o Supralapsarian – election precedes the fall (Beza)o Sub/infralapsarian – God elected after the fall (Turrettini)

Christological doctrine of sino Bartho We know we have sinned in light of Christo 3 parts to sin: pride, sloth, falsehoodo pride: Christ demonstrates humility and obedienceo sloth: Christ is exalted as son of man, elevates humanity

through redemptive world, makes humanity active in process of sanctification

o falsehood: Christ acts as true witness to redemptive work

Lecture 12: Christology 3/9/09 11:17 AM← The person of Christ

Who is JC?← The work of JC

What did he do? Nature of his actions

← The person and work of JC should be understood together← Christological controversies

Doctrine comes out of controversy←← Christological Titles

Messiah/ Christo Anointed one

Anointed by oil for specific purpose – usually relates to kings

Expectation that Messiah would come and restore divinic line, anticipated through prophecy

Not political or war like they though Jesus IS Christ/Messiah

Lordo You can’t write the name of God, Lord was used when

translators moved from Jewish to Greeko Refers specifically to Yahweho Rom 10:9o Phil 2:10-11o Yahweh means Jesus is Lord

Savioro The name Jesus is a Greek form of Hebrew Joshua which

means the Lord saves

o Jesus can do that which God doeso Is 45:21-22, Matt 1:21o Affirmation that he’s able to save, his identity is revealed

Son of Godo 1 John 3:1o used to refer to angelic or supernatural figureo used in Kings in the furnaceo commonly used, Christians are children of God, adopted

childreno Mark 15:39, Jesus is THE son of Godo Jesus baptism and other examples showo Dan 7:13-14 eschatological figureo Affirms Jesus’ humanity John 3:14

Jesus of Nazaretho Emphasizes humanity & divinityo Mat 2:22-23o Fulfils prophecyo Mark 16:6

Godo John 1:1o Mat 1:23

← Schools of Christology Alexandrian school

o Emphasized dvivinity of Christ and unity of two natures (human and divine), soteriology

o Salvation depends on unity of God and humanity in person of JC

o Sometimes called the word-flesh Christology Emphasized salvation as deification

o Emphasis of Eastern Othrodox theologyo Alexandria, Origen, Athenascious, Polenarious, Cyril

Antiochene Schoolo (modern day turkey)o emphasized humanity of JCo distinction between two natureso God cannot change, suffero Morality – redemption of humanity requires obedience on part

of humanityo Humanity of Christo Chrisisteom, Theodore of lapsusia, mestorious

← The person of Jesus Christ Fully Divine

o Is he divine, or was he created?o John 1:1o Arianism (arius) – denies the full divinity of JX “There was a

time when he was not.” Jesus was highest of the creatures – pre-eminent

creature, but not eternal son of God Jesus is not fully God, so he has demoted Christ Heresy – subordinationism

o Athanasius opposed Arianism Jesus is homoousious “of the same substance” with God

not homoiousious “of similar substance” John 10:30, John 17:11 Soteriological concerns – only God can save

Arius says JC cannot save humanity because Jesus is creature, and Athanasius says if Jesus saves, which he does, he must be divine

o Council of Nicaea (325) (IMPORTANT DATE) First ecumenical council comes from this debate Nicene creed was formed, affirmed Athanasius’ position Christ begotten, not made, God from God, light from

light, true god from true god Fully Human

o Word became flesh and dwelt among uso Docetism

Jesus only appears to be human, denies the full humanity of JC

o Apollinarianism Jesus did not have a human mind Saw that the mind might be source of human rebellion Jesus had true body, soul, but not mind

o Gregory of Nazianzus opposed to Apollinarianism What has not been assumed has not been healed All of humanity has to be assumed in the incarnation Jesus has to assume everything about humanity in order

to heal humanityo Council of Constantinope (381)

Second ecumenical council Affirmed Gregory and said Apollinarianism is heretical

One persono Is he one person, or are his natures separateo Nestorianism

Denies that Jesus was one person, denied the use of theotokos (God-bearer)

o Cyril of Alexandria opposed Nestorianism Hypostatic union – union of two natures in one person Two natures are united in one person

o Council of Ephesus (432) Third ecumenical council

Two Natures of person of Christo Is JC both divine and human?o Eutychianism

Denies that there are two natures in JC, monophysitism One nature

o Pope Leo I opposed Eut Two natures united in one person

o Council of Chalcedon (451) 4.17 the orthodox statement

← Christological Controversies Ebionitism

o Jesus was just an ordinary person Adoptionism

o Jesus was adopted as God’s son (usually at baptism) Kenoticism

o Christ emptied himself of divine attributes at the incarnationo Omniscience and omnipresence, divested himself of the use

of these propertieso Was always god, but set aside attributes at incarnation

Tehopaschitismo Jesus suffered in his divine natureo Communicatio ideiomatum – if JC suffered and died, then god

suffered and diedo Communicatio operationum – work of Jesus’ divine nature is

work of other nature

Lecture 13: The Work of JC 3/9/09 11:17 AM← Goes together with who he is, dependent on each other

← Events of JC life← Theological dimensions/implications←← What were the events that took place, what did Christ accomplish/achieve in order to make salvation both possible and real?← Faith & history

3 affirmations:o 1. Particular events took place concerning JC

life, death, resurrection – within context of historyo 2. Events have Universal Significance

although at one place, one time, they have significance for everyone

o 3. Relevant to today and to our lives today

historicity is vital to Christian faith, in particular incarnation, death, resurrection

← Events Incarnation

o Eternal son of God (Logos) assumed human flesho The word became flesh and dwelt among uso Didn’t change into flesh, but assumed flesh, became human

while still remaining godo Sense of god’s condesention, God being humiliatedo Soteriological – motivated by purposes of salvation history

Humanity is fallen, sinful, separated, requires redemption

Work of saving god is needed Athanasius

G of Nyssa Calvin Barth – incarnation of God being analogous to son going

into far countryo Immutability – does incarnation mean change?

Even in this event, God remains Godo Kueng – would son of god have become incarnate if humanity

had not sinned?o Honorious of Autuno Did humanity of Christ always exist?

No, body and soul came into existence at certain point in history

However, some interesting aspects: Anhypostasis/enhypostasis

An: Humanity of Christ has no independence apart from the word of God

En: Humanity of Christ only exists in union with the person of the word of God

o If Christs humanity continues and he exists eternally, then doesn’t his humanity exist eternally?

Can we know son of god apart from jesus of nazerath? Logos asarkos – word without flesh

Difficult idea to maintain Immanent vs economic trinity 2nd person of triune god is JC eternally determined to be jesus of Nazareth

o Did Christ assume fallen human nature? Christ did not sin, tempted but remained without sin But human nature in terms of document of doctrine of

__ sin, Yes, but doesn’t mean he’s guilty of sin

All we are, exactly like us, even inop “be sin for us” – he entered into the fullness of our

situation, without being sinfulo Was the son of God not present in heaven or in triune

interrelationships during incarnation? Calvin: no, he stayed in heaven – extra calvinisticum

(opponents coined this term) Ministry

o Christ’s Passion and Death on the Cross Is 53:3-6 Type of Isaiah is seen in suffering of Christ Suffered temptation, betrayal, Christ truly suffered and died

Resurrectiono The Good News, heart of Christian gospelo Types: Jonah, Ezek 37 –valley of dry boneso NT narratives do not describe resurrection itself

Scenes at empty tomb Resurrection appearances

o Body: JC was raised from dead in bodily form Different about his body, invties thomas to touch, but

not Mary, can appear in closed room, but continuity – recognised and bears marks of crucifiction, looks like common humanity – still eats food

o Triune All involved in every event Resurrection is appropriately applied to act of God the

father 1 Cor 14 Christ involved in resurrection, HS also

Rom 8:11, o Christians, Church

Grounds hope of individuals and collectiveo Eschatological event

First fruits of final resurrection Ascension

o Acts 1:9, Lukeo Did Christ retain humanity after ascension

Yes, no torn apart, separated. Hypostatic union remainso Faith and History – Critiques

All three aspects have been challenged 1st aspect

how can we be sure these events actually happened? Chronological issues. Historicity.

2nd aspect How can this particular history bear universal

truth? Universally applicable? Metaphysical issue. 3rd sense

how can our contemporary experience relate to that history that took place

o Reason: Exclusion of revelation Truth obtained by reason. Necessary and reasonably

true. Rational reflection. Is Christ necessary if we can know God from reasoning? Questions history – things are contingent, not

universally true - Lessing No connection between histocial events and rational

truthso Critiques using reason:

o Personal experience How do these claims relate to personal faith we have? Continuity of history Continuity among people and historical events If we don’t experience resurrection events today, then it

couldn’t happen in the past Hume’s essay on miracles

o Scripture Historical critical method Interpretation: quest for historical Jesus Knowing Jesus prior to Christ worshiped in church

Original quest -> saw JC as apocyliptic visionary -> others took up life of Jesus movement -> criticisms -> Jesus of History vs Christ of faith

o Doctrine/Dogma History of Dogma focused on resurrection

Lessing – rationalistic suspicion Strauss – myth, didn’t happen Bultmann – not possible to believe in miracles

today, but resurrection happens in experience of disciples – rise of faith in disciples

Barth – resurrection as historical event, but a “saga”, like creation, has historical value, but it is beyond our historical investigation

Pannenberg – appeals to history as fundamental and universal basis of humanity. History can only be known by end of time, although this has been revealed already through Christ (proleptic revelation). Christ’s resurrection anticipates end resurrection. Is historical event, is open to interpretation

Midterm: Multi choice Short answer, definitions, significance of x (Nicene creed, hypostatic

union, 325)

1 essayo know list A terms

Soteriology: Doctrine of Salvation 3/9/09 11:17 AM← What is salvation?How is it achieved? (God’s action for us)← How is it received? (God’s action within us)←← Salvation

Rescue/deliverance from danger/peril Concerns God’s intended plan for creation, especially humanity Concerns God’s activity in the person and work of Jesus Christ on

behalf of humanity Acts 4 Reconciliation with God/Atonement

o Broken relationship restoredo God & humanity are reconciledo Atonement is reconciling act. Consequence is at one ment.o Rom 3:25

Forgiveness of sinso Removes guilty notion of sino 1 John 1:9

redemptiono securing ones release

saving God’s peopleo JC is savior, saves God’s peopleo Matt 1:21

Adoption into God’s familyo Have same rights as JCo Gal 4:4-5

o Rom 8:15 Restoration of the imago dei

o Lost and corrupted by sin and fall, restored by Christo Rom 8:29

Justification/Sanctification/Glorificationo A person who is equitted or pardoned from sin – forgiveno God makes those who are sinful acceptable for a holy and

righteous Godo Made righteous in God’s sighto Eph 2:8-9o Sanctification:o Eph 4:22-4o Glorification:o 1 Cor 15:49o eschatological aspect of salvation

has 3 different temporal aspects: past: you have been saved

o Ep 2:8 Present: you are being saved

o 1 Cor 1:18 Future: You will be saved

o Rom 5:10 Deification/theosis

o Being made divine, share in God’s natureo 2 Pet 1:4

← Atonement Tyndale coined this term when made English dictionary God’s reconciling actions in the person and work of JC; results in at

one ment between God and humanity OT: Atonement in terms of God’s relationship with Israel Lev 16:16 NT: atonement in light of Christ’s death and resurrection Heb 2:17

← Theories of the Atonement How does God achieve salvation for us? Ransom/Christus Victor Theory

o Emphasis upon the conflict between the forces of good and evil

o Satan held humanity captive due to sino Christ’s death is the ransom that buys back sinnerso 1 Cor 15:57o Heb 2:14o Irenaeus, Origen, Gregory the Great

Satisfaction Theoryo Emphasis upon the honour that is owed to Godo Heb 9:14o Anselms Cur Deus Homo

Sin damages Go’ds honour Someone must make satifcation for sin Humanity must do this; only God can do this What is required is the God-man

Moral Influence Theoryo Emphasis upon the demonstration of God’s loveo The cross of Christ serves as an example for uso Rom 5:8o Abelard: As a result, our hearts should be set on fire by such a

gift of divine grae, and true love should not hold back from suffering anything for his sake

Cross is not only about example, something ontological is going on.

o Guilt can’t be transferred, God can forgive sins without Jesus Penal Substitution Theory

o Christ took our place and suffered the penalty that was our on our behalf

Our substitute, stood in place of sinnerso Ep 5:2o Heb 9:12o Calvin

← Threefold office of Jesus Christ Prophet

o Called by God, listens to God, proclaims God’s word to the people

o OT: Moses, Sam, Isaiah, Jeremiaho NT: John the Baptist, Jesuso JC declares God’s word

Priesto Makes an atoning and redeeming sacrifice for the people of

Godo OTL Melchizedek, Aarono NT: Zechariah, Caiaphas, Jesuso Not only priest, but he is the offering and sacrifice itself

King:o Rules in God’s name as God’s representative on eartho OT: Saul, David, Solomon, Josiah, God as Kingo NT: Jesus as king in birth, passion, reigno Jesus demonstrates his kingship in humility, dying for the

world, then exalted to God’s right hand. Calvin – Prophet, King, Priest Turrettini – prophet, priest, king – relates to three aspects of sin –

ignorance, guilt, oppression Barth – Priest, King, Prophet

Midterm:Multichoice, short answer, essay q