 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 9:03 AM (GMT -6) |   | |
Heh...
The pastor preaches in designer jeans and skateboarding shoes.
He tweets links to his blog and chats with churchgoers on Facebook.
As members walk into the movie theater or auditorium for services, the pastor and his wife are in the front row, singing along and pumping their fists to loud pop music, played by a live band featuring electric guitars.
Suburban megachurches, move over. There's a hipper game in town.
"We know a lot of people have left their mainline churches because it's boring," said Tory Farina, 31, lead pastor at High Point Church in Inver Grove Heights. "They felt they were forced to go. We want them to love it....Our Sunday services feel like a concert."
Awesome...right?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 9:06 AM (GMT -6) | | | The article talks about the Association of Related Churches...or ARC as the grounding force for this movement. Here is their website. The article above said...
11 years ago, six pastors in the southeast United States decided to help other, like-minded clergy start Christian churches that could draw a new generation. Since then, the group has helped "plant" more than 200 churches in the U.S., including High Point and Substance.
The churches generally follow a formula for service, which includes a contemporary rock band and a sermon that feels more like chatting with a buddy. The churches meet anywhere, usually leasing auditoriums or theaters from local performing-arts groups or colleges. They have slick websites, complete with highly produced videos, often set to rock music.
"One of our basic missions is attracting the unchurched," said Michael W. Smith, executive director of the Association of Related Churches. "We are creating a service where the unchurched can feel comfortable and hear a message they can relate to. Weekend messages are often centered on a topic rather than a verse of the Bible."
There's a buzzword among ARC members: "Relevant."
Their service is relevant, pastors say, referring to rock music. The message is relevant, with sermons that are peppered with funny videos, often made by an in-house creative arts team. Pastors preach about marriages, raising young children and the power of positive thinking, and young, energetic clergy use examples from their own lives.
Even the dress code is relevant. Worshippers show up in shorts, flip-flops, even ball caps.
But, ARC officials are quick to point out, their pastors are ordained with the Assemblies of God, a more traditional Pentecostal denomination.
The message still focuses on Christ.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 9:13 AM (GMT -6) | | Here is from their statement of faith...
We believe that there is One God, eternally revealed to the world in the Father, the Son, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. By Him were all things created. We believe that God sent His Son, Jesus Christ to redeem all of mankind. Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life on this earth, performed many undeniable miracles, was crucified for our sins, buried and was raised from the dead for our justification. By the name of Jesus Christ, and His name only, can mankind be saved. Jesus Christ sits at the Right Hand of the Father and will return personally in power and glory to receive His Church unto Himself.
Just think.
Could a tri-theistic or Apollinarian or "kenotic" Christian believe this?
Yep.
So...who's making sure that it's NOT that with all these growing churches?
Hmmm..
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 8:16:55 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 9:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmm...interesting.
Decided to look up the Fundamental Truths for the AG.
Tell me what you see.
------------------------------------
The one true God has revealed Himself as the eternally self-existent "I AM," the Creator of heaven and earth and the Redeemer of mankind. He has further revealed Himself as embodying the principles of relationship and association as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
...
Christ taught a distinction of Persons in the Godhead which He expressed in specific terms of relationship, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but that this distinction and relationship, as to its mode is inscrutable and incomprehensible, because unexplained.
...
c. Unity of the One Being of Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Accordingly, therefore, there is that in the Father which constitutes him the Father and not the Son; there is that in the Son which constitutes Him the Son and not the Father; and there is that in the Holy Spirit which constitutes Him the Holy Spirit and not either the Father or the Son. Wherefore the Father is the Begetter, the Son is the Begotten, and the Holy Spirit is the one proceeding from the Father and the Son. Therefore, because these three persons in the Godhead are in a state of unity, there is but one Lord God Almighty and His name one.
d. Identity and Cooperation in the Godhead
The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are never identical as to Person; nor confused as to relation; nor divided in respect to the Godhead; nor opposed as to cooperation. The Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son as to relationship. The Son is with the Father and the Father is with the Son, as to fellowship. The Father is not from the Son, but the Son is from the Father, as to authority. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son proceeding, as to nature, relationship, cooperation and authority. Hence, neither Person in the Godhead either exists or works separately or independently of the others.
...
j. Equal Honor to the Father and to the Son
Wherefore, since the Father has delivered all judgment unto the Son, it is not only the express duty of all in heaven and on earth to bow the knee, but it is an unspeakable joy in the Holy Spirit to ascribe unto the Son all the attributes of Deity, and to give Him all honor and the glory contained in all the names and titles of the Godhead except those which express relationship (see Distinction and Relationship in the Godhead, Unity of the One Being of Father, Son and Holy Spirit , and Identity and Cooperation in the Godhead) and thus honor the Son even as we honor the Father.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 9:45:45 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 9:50 AM (GMT -6) | | Just a thought, though.
Therefore, because these three persons in the Godhead are in a state of unity, there is but one Lord God Almighty and His name one.
It seems that they are saying that the relational unity of the 3 persons is the ground for the "oneness" of God: there is One Lord God and His name is one BECAUSE OF their state of unity. They are NOT saying that the unity of the 3 persons (and the ground of divine nature and personhood) is the Father. It's even clarified here...
The Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son as to relationship. The Son is with the Father and the Father is with the Son, as to fellowship. The Father is not from the Son, but the Son is from the Father, as to authority. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son proceeding, as to nature, relationship, cooperation and authority. Hence, neither Person in the Godhead either exists or works separately or independently of the others.
Seems to me that one could easily be a tritheist and hold to this. It's saying that ALL the persons have the divine nature and the relationships differ simply as to hypostatic perspective, authority and economy. It does not make clear at all that the Father is the sole and continual ground for the divinity and personhood seen in the Trinity.
See what I'm saying?
Basically, you and I hold (with Chalcedonian Christianity) that it's not the perichoretic activity of the 3 divine hypostases that grounds the Tri-Unity of God...but it's the ontological "monarchia" of God the Father as ground of that whole self-relational, perichoretic process that does it. As I'm seeing it, the AG affirmation just holds that God the Father is never subordinate in authority to the Son or the Spirit. That's different.
This...PLUS using the Filioque...would (I think) leads further away from trinitarian monotheism.
What do you think?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, True God of True God, Begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man; And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; And ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father; And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets;
And I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the Resurrection of the dead, and the Life of the age to come.
Amen.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 9:06:38 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 10:20 AM (GMT -6) | | My thought:
The ontological "monarchia" of the Father is the only thing that keeps the One Triune God from effectively being a social-trinity-cum-tritheism. I believe even this dude saw that one can't get away from it biblically. (He calls it the "generous preeminence of the Father" ) Without that "monarchia", it's WAAAAAY too easy for tritheism to occur. Actually, inevitable, I would say.
Reposting...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Monarchy": God the Father or the Essence/Godhead?"
This statement from one of the respondents was ABSOLUTELY on point:
The divine unity, then, has to be anchored in something more than the shared essence. There are two main candidates for that "something more": perichoresis and monarchy. Social trinitarians make the former into a substitute for the latter, but that's not what the Cappadocians did. If anything, they put the emphasis on the monarchy, with the mutual indwelling following from the Son and Spirit's being the Word and Spirit of the One God.
Point proven by the JETS paper...
To presuppose that on rational grounds, as some moderns contend, one person cannot inhabit another seems to fall short of the biblical portrayal not only of the Godhead, but also of the indwelling of a human being by either the Holy Spirit or, for that matter, a malignant spirit. It is perichoresis—the personal interpenetration of each member of the Godhead in the other through mutual activity of invitation and indwelling—that most adequately explains how three self-consciences can also be one in consciousness, thought, will, and action. So intrinsic is this perichoretic unity that God acts as the one and the three. While each personever possesses distinct mental properties and unique relation to the others, the entire Holy Trinity co-exists in corporate, exhaustive harmony. Although not resolving the mystery, the doctrine of perichoresis helps explain the unity of the divine mind and will without slipping into either modalism or tritheism, into which it seems other solutions fall.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 9:25:09 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 10:41 AM (GMT -6) | | Interesting...
The Statement of Fundamental Truths is a description of the 16 essential doctrines adhered to by the General Council of the Assemblies of God in the United States of America. These doctrines are heavily based on evangelical confessions of faith but differ by being clearly Pentecostal. Of the 16 articles, four are considered core beliefs "due to the key role they play in reaching the lost and building the believer and the church". They are the doctrines concerning salvation, the baptism in the Holy Spirit, divine healing, and the Second Coming of Christ. It was adopted in 1916 and has virtually remained unchanged.
...
The Assemblies of God was founded in 1914; however, it was not until 1916 that it reluctantly created the Fundamental Truths in response to several doctrinal controversies. The first controversy, referred to as the Finished work controversy, arose from disagreement over the "second blessing" and the practical meaning of holiness. The second or "Oneness" controversy questioned the baptismal formula, the doctrine of the Trinity, and the understanding of the process of salvation. The third one was over whether speaking in tongues was the "initial physical evidence" of Holy Spirit baptism or not.
The outcome of these controversies, reflected in the Statement of Fundamental Truths, not only shaped the denomination but also shaped American Pentecostalism. The 4th General Council of 1916 took a strong stand against the Oneness teaching and upheld the position that speaking in tongues was the initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Assemblies of God remains Trinitarian and continues to affirm the doctrine of initial evidence.
I'm starting to have a sneaking suspicion that the AG is HISTORICALLY a "social trinitarian" denomination.
Hmmm...
The Concept of one 'being' in Social Trinity
As in almost all orthodox versions of the doctrine of the trinity, the term 'being' is used to identify the 'one' in the trinity. Social trinity argues that this one being comes to exist as a result of a loving relationship between Father, Son, and Spirit. This relationship is in some respects like human relationships, but in many respects it promotes a greater unity. They often understand the idea of perichoresis of the persons of the trinity as providing at least part of this greater unity.
Let's see that again...
c. Unity of the One Being of Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Accordingly, therefore, there is that in the Father which constitutes him the Father and not the Son; there is that in the Son which constitutes Him the Son and not the Father; and there is that in the Holy Spirit which constitutes Him the Holy Spirit and not either the Father or the Son. Wherefore the Father is the Begetter, the Son is the Begotten, and the Holy Spirit is the one proceeding from the Father and the Son. Therefore, because these three persons in the Godhead are in a state of unity, there is but one Lord God Almighty and His name one.
Well...?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 9:50:51 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 10:54 AM (GMT -6) | | | DANG! They weren't lyin!
Google "Minutes of the General Council of the Assemblies" and click the link! It's a PDF file of the minutes of the ACTUAL 1916 meeting!
Things HADN'T changed that much! 
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 10:05:54 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 10:58 AM (GMT -6) | | Yep. Like I thought.
The founders of the fellowship did not intend to create a denomination and originally had no creed or doctrinal statement. However in response to several doctrinal issues, the most important being the Oneness teaching, the AG felt the need for agreement on central doctrines and to reassure evangelical Christians of its adherence to orthodox belief. Oneness Pentecostalism rejected Trinitarian theology, instead identifying the Jehovah of the Old Testament with the Christ of the New. Furthermore, Oneness adherents believed that Christians, regardless of a previous baptism, should be baptized in the name of Jesus, rather than in the name of the Trinity. By 1915, it was adhered to by many in the fellowship, including founders such as Goss, Opperman, Hall, and Henry G. Rodgers. Other influential leaders, such as G. T. Haywood, adopted the Oneness doctrine as well.
In 1916, the 4th General Council met in St. Louis to resolve the "new issue". In a move that caused not a little anxiety, a committee introduced the Statement of Fundamental Truths. Oneness proponents and others saw this as an attack on the authority of the Bible, yet it was adopted along with a recommendation that AG ministers use the Trinitarian baptismal formula. Old preaching credentials were recalled and new ones issued with the Fundamental Truths included. Oneness believers, including a third of the fellowship’s ministers, were forced to withdraw, a loss especially felt in the South where the Oneness doctrine had the most influence. A side effect of this was a transition in leadership from former Apostolic Faith leaders, many of whom accepted the Oneness teaching, to men with Christian and Missionary Alliance backgrounds. The Oneness dissenters formed the General Assembly of the Apostolic Churches, which later merged with another group to form the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World.
This whole "debate" was because of ignorance of the Ecumenical Councils. Period. They basically "relived" all the doctrinal struggles that had LONG been dealt with.
But what's interesting is this: This seems to PARALLEL what happened to Greg: in opposing Oneness theology, he went the other way and ended up a social-trinitarian-cum-tritheist!
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 10:07:01 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 12:13 PM (GMT -6) | | | Say, Tom. Wanna be the hero of the AG?
Propose this addition...
The Father's eternal begetting of the Son and eternal grounding of the Spirit's procession issues in a state of essential unity in the Godhead.
Such that C. now reads...underlined the changes...
c. Unity of the One Being of Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Accordingly, therefore, there is that in the Father which constitutes him the Father and not the Son; there is that in the Son which constitutes Him the Son and not the Father; and there is that in the Holy Spirit which constitutes Him the Holy Spirit and not either the Father or the Son. Wherefore the Father is the Begetter, the Son is the Begotten, and the Holy Spirit is the one proceeding from the Father and the Son. The Father's eternal begetting of the Son and eternal grounding of the Spirit's procession issues in a state of essential unity in the Godhead. Therefore, because these three persons in the Godhead are in such a state of unity, there is but one Lord God Almighty and His name one.
That ONE ADDITION clarifies the ONENESS and "UNITY" of divine being is ultimately and continually grounded in the Father...even though there is a "state of unity" of relationality between 3 divine personal perspectives from that grounding.
Whacha think?
Why doncha talk to your Superintendent homie? Heh. 
Why WOULDN'T the make this addition? It's not even controversial and it's nothing but helpful, orthodoxy-wise.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 12:20:24 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/13/2011 12:30 PM (GMT -6) | | | Think of the IMPACT that ONE CHANGE could make to the World Assemblies of God Fellowship...or to the whole Association of Related Churches thing.
"But, ARC officials are quick to point out, their pastors are ordained with the Assemblies of God, a more traditional Pentecostal denomination."
Yeah.
It's all you, bro.
I'm dead serious.
Holla at dude.
Also, why don't you initiate a POSITION PAPER on Evangelical Kenotic Christology, articulating AG's position on that? I think you'll already have the backing you need, right?
As the need arises to make a statement on a controversial issue, a study is done and a report given to the General Presbytery for approval as an official statement of The General Council of the Assemblies of God.
You've got a slam dunker.
Save those ARCer kids from Across the Spectrum's Kenotic View!!!!!
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 11/13/2011 11:56:03 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 11/13/2011 5:29 PM (GMT -6) | | D: Seems to me that one could easily be a tritheist and hold to this. It's saying that ALL the persons have the divine nature and the relationships differ simply as to hypostatic perspective, authority and economy. It does not make clear at all that the Father is the sole and continual ground for the divinity and personhood seen in the Trinity.
See what I'm saying?
Basically, you and I hold (with Chalcedonian Christianity) that it's not the perichoretic activity of the 3 divine hypostases that grounds the Tri-Unity of God...but it's the ontological "monarchia" of God the Father as ground of that whole self-relational, perichoretic process that does it. As I'm seeing it, the AG affirmation just holds that God the Father is never subordinate in authority to the Son or the Spirit. That's different.
J: D, you're emphasis on the "monarchia" of the Father creates problems for your "two-mind" Christology. For you claim the issue is to explain how Jesus of Nazareth could be "fully man AND fully God."
First of all, if by "God" we mean the tri-personal BEING of traditional trinitarianism, then it is obvious that no single person of the godhead is fully "God" in that sense. On the other hand, the only way each person can be fully "God" in the sense of divine personal attributes is if those attributes of the Father that are unique to Him (His role as "monarchia" e.g.) are not essential divine personal attributes. But how could we know that? What you and Tom are claiming as a theological dogma is nothing more than philosophical speculation. Scripture can't get us there.
The bottom line is that the phrase "fully God" has to mean either:
1) "fully" in the sense of essential attributes of the divine BEING
or
2) "fully" in the sense of essential attributes of divine personhood (where divine person is NOT a distinct being).
Since 1) is not doable, what do you insist are the essential attributes of divine personhood, and how do you know it? Explaining the latter will involve explaining why Jesus, Paul, etc called the first person of the godhead the ONE, TRUE GOD in contexts where "ONE" clearly means QUANTITY. And insomuch as it means quantity, the OT monotheism is SATISFIED thereby independent of positing anything like the orthodox trinity, much less the "two-mind" Christology.
All of this on top of the seemingly logical impossibility of accounting for how the first-person conscious perspective of an omniscient person can simultaneously be the first-person conscious NON-omniscient perspective of a human.
Post Edited (Similitude) : 11/13/2011 7:29:47 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:24 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|