Archive for the ‘Paterology’ category

REVIEW: “The Community Life of God”

April 27th, 2010

Introduction

Milt Rodriguez is the author of “The Community Life of God.”  Rodriguez contacted me some time ago to asked if I would review his book.  I was intrigued by the topic of the book and agreed to post my thoughts.

Rodriguez is involved in the Organic Church movement and his book is endorsed by author Frank Viola and house church advocate Jon Zens.  ”The Community Life of God” attempts to lay both a practical and theological foundation for the Trinity as the model of all relationships.

What Works

The strength of this book is Rodriguez’s emphasis on the practical need within the church to build deep relationships.  Rodriguez writes, “Building  cannot happen with stones who occasionally and casually meet together (106).”  Community life only happens when there is a deep investment and willingness to sacrifice for others.  Rodriguez argues that as the Trinity works in concert, so too each member of the church must eschew individualism and work together to fulfill the purpose of God (130).

David Flowers has a good summary of what works well in this book.  Flowers writes,

Rodriguez proposes that much of Christian activity today is spent furthering the individualistic mindset that is so popular in our culture. Even when believers come together corporately there is not an understanding of God’s image among us. Church life ought to be more than socializing and individual Christian ministries.

On this point I think every Christian can agree and aspire.

What Needs Work

The book started off a bit rough for me.  The introductory chapter has some awkwardly worded paragraphs that are more confusing than helpful.  For example, the following paragraph is supposed to define God’s purpose in the creation of man.

Why did God create?  What was the motivational factor in the creation?  I think that we can safely say the He created in order to put His plan into action; to take the first step toward fulfilling His purpose.  You see, there is the purpose, but then there is His plan to fulfill the purpose.  The purpose is His goal.  The plan is the way to achieve that goal. The apostle Paul speaks of this “plan” in his letter to the Ephesians.

“Why did God create?”  This paragraph does not help answer the question and quite honestly the entire introduction to the books is more frustrating than insightful.

At times, Rodriguez tries to lecture the reader.  He writes,

Now please pay attention very carefully.

When you just read my quotation of that verse in Colossians you immediately took that verse and applied it to you as an individual (49).

Stylistically, it is a bit off-putting when a writer lectures the reader about what they think or feel. Some readers may not mind this approach, but for me it created a barrier.  Writing style aside, the bigger issue is Rodriguez’s theology.

In Rodriguez’s effort to counter the individualistic church culture, he tends to overstate his case.  In this example, Rodriguez asserts that anyone who says they are, as an individual, made in the image of Christ is repeating a lie of Satan.

Yet I hear believers talking all the time about being “like Jesus”or being “like Christ.”  Yet the scriptures do not ever teach that you, as an individual, can be like Christ.  That again, is the delusion of the ole’ serpant.  You cannot be like Jesus.  You were never meant to be like Jesus (52).

While I agree with Rodriguez that community is key to being conformed to the image of Christ, this in no way precludes the meaning for the individual disciple.

The most disconcerting aspect of Rodriguez’s theology is his bent toward “Open Theism”    That is, Rodriguez takes the “community” of God’s being  as analogous to the “community” of humanity (see Smith, Fred, “Does Classical Theism Deny God’s Immanence?” vol. 160, Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 160, 637 (Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 2003), 22-24.).  Here is a sampling of quotes where Rodriguez’s theology should be critically examined.

“From God’s perspective, Christ is no longer a single person. He is a corporate person, Christ and the Church are a single reality (87).” Quoting Frank Viola’s book, “From Here to Eternity”

“The Man is a new creation, a new species.  He is made up of both God and Man.  He is composed of both divinity and humanity.  God and man have been merged together as one in Christ (88).

“Who is in charge [of the church]?”  Christ is in charge.  A Christ who is made up of both the Head and the Body.  The One New Man(141).”

Ultimately, Rodriguez’s book blurs important distinction between the Creator and the Created.. and key difference between Christ and the Church.

Summary

There is no need, nor any biblical root, for connecting the essential “community-life” of Church with the “community-life” of the Trinity.  There is a significant amount of Scripture that teaches the necessity of community that stands on its own without reading into it a philosophical paradigm that recreates God in the image of humanity.  We, as the Church, can achieve a practical community life without the kind of “creative” theology embraced in “The Community Life of God.

 

  • Share/Bookmark

One Year With Karl Barth: God The Father

June 8th, 2009

Barth affirms that the Father, Son and Spirit are part of the one God, but this section of CD emphasizes the uniqueness of the Father.  Barth asserts that the dignity, lordship, and even the superiority of Jesus is subordinate to the “theos”.

In the so-called Synoptic Gospels this approach is especially prominent. It almost sounds like a false note, and is certainly an enigma, when even and precisely in these Gospels Jesus is called Kyrios. For what is Jesus here but a single pointer to the Lord whose kingdom (not His own) Jesus announces and declares by word and deed in a way that hardly distinguishes Him either formally or materially from John the Baptist, in relation to whom as the only One who is good (Mk. 10:18) Jesus associates Himself with His disciples in the address: Our Father!, whose will He very definitely differentiates from His own (Mk. 14:36), to whom He prays, as is repeatedly emphasised, and obedience to whom seems to be in the last resort the whole meaning of His calling and work. He is thus called the (ἅγιος) παῖς* of God like David and the Servant of the Lord of Isaiah 53…

Barth concludes that jesus’s authority and lordship was only a manifestation of the Father’s.

Looked at along these lines the lordship of Jesus as the Son of God is obviously only a manifestation, exercise and application of the lordship of God the Father. The essence of the deity ascribed to Jesus is to make clear and impart and give effect to who God the Father is, who God is in the true sense, and what He wills and does with man. It is to represent this God the Father.

Barth seems to define the nature of Father through the lens of the Son. Most significantly, Barth sees that the most important aspect of God the Father is that his “fatherhood” goes beyond the analogy of human parentage, but that the Father, through the death and resurrection of the Son, is the Lord of both life and death for all creation. Let me close then with a summaratoin from Barth’s own words.

God our Father means God our Creator (cf. for this Deut. 32:6 and Is. 64:7). And it should be clear by now that it is specifically in Christ, as the Father of Jesus Christ, that God is called our Creator. That God is our Creator is not a general truth that we can know in advance or acquire on our own; it is a truth of revelation. Only as that which we know elsewhere as the father-son relation is transcended by the Word of Christ the Crucified and Risen, only as it is interpreted by this Word, which means, in this case, only as it acquires from this Word a meaning which it cannot have of itself, only in this way may we see what creation means. But in this way we can see. The Father of Jesus Christ who according to the witness of Scripture is revealed in Jesus His Servant has the qualities of a Lord of our existence. The witness to Him leads us to the place where the miracle of creation can be seen. It bears witness to the holy God, the God who alone is God, the free God. It is this witness that we have to understand with the help of the basic statements of the doctrine of the Trinity.

For Barth, uniqueness of God the Father, and Creator, is only manifest as our father because he is first the Father of Jesus the Son and we come to the knowledge and experience of the Father through Jesus’ death and resurrection.

———-
* All quotes from Karl Barth, Geoffrey William. Bromiley and Thomas F. Torrance, Church Dogmatics, Volume I The Doctrine of the Word of God, Part 1, 2d ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2004), 384-.
  • Share/Bookmark

The Triple Point of God

April 21st, 2009

“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” Romans 1:20

One of my favorite college courses was Thermodynamics.  It was my strongest science class and–call me a geek–I still enjoy reading books on the stuff when I can.  One of the coolest parts of science is discovering how God reveals Himself through His creation.

The Trinity is one of the most difficult concepts of the Christian faith, (just check out Barth and Zacharias).  There are tons of analogies and models people use to try and comprehend this unity in diversity.  Without a doubt, the one model that makes the most sense is found in what thermodynamacists call “The Triple Point“.
In simple terms, the Triple Point is when the Temperature and Pressure conditions are in perfect balance so that a substance can exist simultaneously in all three phases.  For example, water exists in one of three primary phases; solid, liquid or gas.   But when the temperature and pressure are just right, water can be a solid, a liquid and a gas at the exact same time.   Here is a simple graphic illustration of the Triple Point.

Triple Point is the coexistence of all three phases in perfect equilibrium.

For me, the Triple Point is a beautiful picture of YHWH who exists in the balance of Time and Eternity as Father, Son and Spirit–each one with a unique phase, yet each one existing in perfect equilibrium that cannot be divided–one from the other.
Even if understanding the Triple Point does not answer every question about the Trinity of YHWH, it should at least demonstrate the possibility of the diversity in unity that is God.
  • Share/Bookmark

Unity in Diversity of the Triune God

April 17th, 2009

On Monday I posted about Karl Barth’s view on the trinity.  In response to some of the questions I have had come in to me, I would like to share this short video clip from Dr. Ravi Zacharias.  Anyone who knows me is aware that I have a total man-crush on Ravi’s brain… so I will simply allow him to speak to “the unity of diversity in the community of the Trinity.”

  • Share/Bookmark