Without the Trinity the Doctrine of the Atonement Goes off the Rails
We need to recognize that, through and through, the doctrine of atonement needs to be thoroughly Trinitarian. It’s centered on Christ. Jesus is the Son of the Father who is empowered by the Spirit.
The Apex of God’s Mission
The atonement is the apex of the triune mission of God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit working together to reconcile sinners and renew creation. And without the doctrine of the Trinity, everything in the atonement goes off.
I’ll give you a couple of examples. One is a classic—you could say infamous—sermon illustration by preachers where there’s the train track conductor who’s looking down and he sees his son playing in the tracks. He looks over and he sees the train coming down, and he has to make the decision. Does he sacrifice his son and save everyone else by shifting the gears, or does he not? And the train goes off of the tracks.
The problem with this illustration, even though it makes the point that God is a father who sacrifices his son, is that it puts the son in a position where he’s not willingly giving his life. He’s blindsided by the father, and the father’s not doing what he does out of love. He doesn’t even know the people on the train. It’s this utilitarian principle of saving the most people.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
Explaining Anomalies
Written by R.C. Sproul |
Friday, May 26, 2023
One of the most satisfying and faith-increasing exercises in my own lifetime has involved giving focused attention to alleged biblical difficulties. That’s because the more I study them and see their resolutions, the more I back away from the text in utter amazement that the Bible can be so coherent and so consistent and so unified at the tiniest level of the fine details. Its symmetry, its complexity, and its harmony are astonishing.Unbelievers often allege that the Bible is “full of contradictions.” I’ve noted in many places over the years, however, that most of the contradictions people suggest really do not qualify as contradictions but merely reflect the difference in perspective we get when several eyewitnesses describe the same event but give different details. In such cases, the accounts do not contradict one another; rather, each account may emphasize different aspects of the same event, such that we get a fuller picture when we see how the details can be harmonized. Variations in perspective are exactly what we should expect even in a divinely inspired text, for the Holy Spirit did not override the personalities and styles of the individual authors when they wrote. Instead, the Spirit worked through their concerns to give us an inerrant record of what happened even as each writer focuses on some details and not others.
The vast majority of supposed “contradictions” in Scripture are relatively easy to reconcile. However, for the sake of honesty, I must acknowledge that there are a handful of problems in Scripture that are exceedingly difficult. For instance, it’s hard at times to square 1 and 2 Chronicles with 1 and 2 Kings, particularly with respect to when certain kings reigned, how long they ruled, and when they took the throne. Some have done the yeoman’s work of figuring out how these accounts fit together, which requires detailed knowledge of how ancient Near Eastern peoples recorded dates, periods of co-regency when two kings ruled at the same time, and other such things. No universally accepted solution has yet been found for every problem, but the work continues, and there’s every reason to believe we will have better answers as we learn more about how ancient Near Eastern writers, including the authors of Kings and Chronicles, did their work.
I’m confident such problems will eventually be solved because we serve a God who speaks truthfully and consistently, and because archaeological discoveries continue to confirm the biblical account. As an example, for many years all we knew about Pontius Pilate came from the Bible and a few other extrabiblical documents, so some people questioned whether Pilate ever existed.
Read More
Related Posts: -
An Appeal for Silence and Solitude
The key is that when you do engage in silence and solitude, you are purposeful with that time and protect its intent. As the eighteenth-century pastor and theologian Jonathan Edwards wrote, “A true Christian…delights at times to retire from all mankind, to converse with God in solitary places. And this has its peculiar advantages for fixing his heart, and engaging its affections. True religion disposes persons to be much alone in solitary places, for holy meditation and prayer.”
I daresay that one of the greatest threats to the spiritual vitality of Christians today is the absence of routine silence and solitude. In 2017, Domo Inc., a cloud-based software company, measured how much data humans across the world generate each minute. Their findings were staggering: every minute, 15,220,700 texts were sent, 103,447,520 spam emails were delivered, 527,260 photos were shared on Snapchat, 4,146,600 videos were viewed on YouTube, and Amazon made $258,751 in sales. Altogether, Americans alone used 2,657,700 gigabytes of data every 60 seconds. Without a doubt, these numbers have only gone up in the past few years. We live in an unprecedented era of noise and distraction.
A well-known Christian wrote, “I think the devil has made it his business to monopolize on three elements: noise, hurry, and crowds…Satan is quite aware of the power of silence.” After reading these words for the first time, I would have guessed they were said by a pastor or theologian of our generation. But the person who wrote them was Jim Elliot—a missionary who died in 1956. These words were penned well before computers, smartphones, texting, social media, and emails. If Christian leaders were concerned by society’s appetite for chaos over calm before the advent of these inventions, imagine the effect technology has on our lives today. To say the least, the digital age of accessibility and connectivity has wreaked havoc on our ability to uphold the sanctity of silence and solitude.
Anti-Technology?
Now, it’s worth stating that I am not anti-technology. Technology is woven into the fabric of my life, as I suspect it is with yours. Not a day passes where I don’t use it or feel its impact. We enjoy countless advantages and conveniences in life because of technology. More than that, technology has been instrumental in gospel advancement around the world.
I am not suggesting we cut ties with technology. I am, however, advocating that we regularly cut the power to it and dedicate part of each day to silence and solitude. No phones. No tablets. No computers. No ability to hear that notification alerting you of a text message or comment on your social media post. Turn technology off.
Purposeful Silence and Solitude
The silence and solitude we need are not happenstantial, where circumstances of the day coincidentally result in a quiet environment. The kind of silence and solitude I am advocating for is purposeful, whereby this act is not an end, but the means to the greatest end—worship. Time must be deliberately set aside for this endeavor. Perhaps Robert Plummer, a New Testament scholar, states it best: “Times of solitude and silence for the Christian are not for a mental or emotional boost, but acts of worship where one’s focus can be placed unwaveringly on the gracious God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
The day-to-day cares and distractions of this world so easily tug our minds and hearts from the preeminence God deserves in our lives. There is nothing inherently evil about technology or social media, yet their influence can subtly impose great harm to the soul simply because they consume our attention with such ease.
Read More -
Deconstruction’s Timely Reminder for Christians
If we build our hope and faith on anything other than Jesus Christ clothed in the gospel, then we are building our faith on sinking sand. The moment a church hurts you, a pastor fails you, or the church fails in living out the gospel in the world, your faith will be shaken because you have built it on these things (sinking sand).
Deconstructing1 and departing from the Christian faith appears to be a popular conversation right now. It should be noted that the problem of apostasy and sin within the church is not a new phenomena. The total depravity of man and deceitfulness of sin have been with man since the Fall. With that being said, Paul Maxwell’s recent “Joe Rogan” like interview with Anthony Bradley brings this conversation up again.
Dr. Paul Maxwell was a popular young theologian/ philosopher who left the Christian faith a year ago. He has written numerous journal articles, was a contributor to TGC and Desiring God, and has studied under some notable Reformed scholars. Also, his dissertation was recently published: The Trauma of Doctrine. By all accounts, Paul appeared to be a rising scholar, who many men in evangelicalism flocked to due to his straightforward writing and podcast at Self-Wire. Given these details, it is to no wonder that Paul’s “sudden” departure from the Christian faith was unsettling to some.2
In light of Paul’s recent interview explaining his “journey from Calvinism to atheism,” I want to offer a few observations on the interview itself, and then move to how these observations give Christians a timely reminder.
Observations
First, there is no doubt in my mind Paul Maxwell has dealt with some real hurt in his family upbringing and experience within the church and academy. Certainly, the hurt in the former shaped how he received and dealt with the hurt the in latter.3
Second, what is telling throughout the interview (“Maxwell’s” deconversion story) is that Maxwell came to “evangelicalism” out of a deep need of belonging and finding love due to his poor home life- where love was contractual. As he describes his “conversion” at age sixteen, there is little to anything said about the gospel and his need for reconciliation with God. It appears he found a warm home with Christianity because “love” could be found there. Christianity gave him a way to live to be loved by God and others.
Paul’s draw to Christianity appears to be something other than the gospel. This further plays into how he dealt with hurt from those within Christianity. This is neither an excuse for those who “actually” did hurt Paul nor is it placing blame solely at Paul’s feet. The point is that what drew Paul to Christianity likely became his foundation and identity of what being a Christian means. A Christian identity or belief built on something other than the gospel will always erode and crack under the pressure. Jesus’ parable of the seed and the sower is helpful on this point.
Third, there is a real sense in the interview that he pursued academic theology divorced from the local church and the foundation of the gospel. He pursued knowledge and credentials to understand the trauma of his life and to further belong in “evangelicalism” as a “good solider.” This approach to theology is a foundation that is ripe for deconstruction and leaving the faith
Fourth, the last fifteen minutes of the interview are the most heart-breaking. As Bradley asks Paul about the advice he would give to young guys who are trying to understand where he is at, Paul goes on an pretty animated piece about how people should not waste their time emailing him, telling him why he is wrong, and that he is going to hell. He says that he has tried with more effort and energy to be a Christian than any of those young guys. He goes on to say no one has read more, studied more, and wrestled more with Christianity than he has.
The reality is Paul tried to be a Christian on the basis of his works and never really understood the gospel in the first place, which was highlighted early in the interview when he speaks of being a supporter of N. T. Wright. It is understandable why there would be relief and even “happiness” for someone who departed the faith after years of “trying to be a Christian” on their own merit. That is a miserable pursuit that always ends in ruin. Sin will ensure it and the law will expose it.
Reminders for Christians
Deconstruction is simply disbelief and a departure from Christianity, fashioned with fancy postmodern language. Our hearts should be broken and should lament for those who have left the Christian faith, praying for their salvation, but we should not be shaken by their departure.
First, it is evidence that they were not really among the people of God (1 Jn 2:19). Second, the security and assurance of our salvation and hope is rooted in the object of our faith and not our faith itself. Jesus Christ is a sure anchor for our souls, who secured salvation for us through mediatorial work as our high priest (Heb 6:19–20). Our hope and trust is fully in God alone (1 Pt 1:19–21), who elected us in eternity, redeemed us at the cross, and applied salvation to us at our conversion all according to God’s great mercy (Eph 1:3–14).4
Read More