Tuesday, April 16, 2024
Tuesday, April 2, 2024
The Pentecostals, Charismatics, and the Reformed
I myself went to a Pentecostal seminary for almost three years. What I am troubled about are the things going on with extreme Pentecostalism that typically led to mysticism, emotionalism, and for worst pantheism and folk Christianity. This is the reason why Pentecostalism is constantly being called out as the fountainhead of NAR though of course we have to carefully evaluate this claim and not label all Pentecostals to be heretics in general.
The Reformed, on the other hand, is not solely the one we are tracing from the history of Protestant reformation because even the Pentecostals will be traced from that. What we reckon with here is the "Reformed Theology" that is a body of doctrine that reflects the teachings of Protestant reformers Ulrich Zwingli and John Calvin and is also referred to as "Calvinism" although this can be critical on the other hand as not all reformed theologians, scholars, and churches are Calvinists[2].
Denominations holding to the reformed theology stretches from some Baptists, Presbyterians, and Congregationalists. Reformed theology is simply a belief system that seeks to continue the Apostolic doctrine[3]. The Westminster Confession plainly embodies the theology of the Reformed tradition, which stresses the authority of the Scripture, sovereignty of God, and salvation by grace.
One controversial theological view that the Pentecostals and the Reformed argue so much about is the cessationist view, explaining that the gifts are no longer extended to the present church and are only for the early church in the New Testament period.
Another controversial issue that leads to the conflicting views of Pentecostals and Reformed is the doctrine on the five-fold ministry. Pentecostals believe that Apostles and Prophets still exist today but the Reformed tradition firmly teaches that the cornerstone work of the Apostles and Prophets has already been completed. Because of the conflicting views, there are many churches today that are divided and many are found wounded as a result of heartless debates and amongst them are the people in my own province.
All these issues in one way or another are rooting from bad theologies about the “Kingdom of God” be it in the eschatological sense, i.e. Premillenial view of the NAR movements, or in the ecclesiological sense, i.e. the defective interpretation of visible and the invisible Kingdom.
Some working questions for this these would be:
1. Do we still
have Apostles and Prophets in the Church today?
2. Does the
Five-Fold ministry in Ephesians 4:11-12 apply to the Church today?
3. Where does the
New Age Reformation come from and how do we address the errors?
4.
How do we treat the brothers and sisters who are currently in danger of being
part of the NAR movement?
[1]
From Classical Pentecostalism, First wave, second wave up to the third wave
Toronto Blessings perspectives.
[2] Reformed theology is so broad that
Calvinism is just a small part of it.
[3]
Not agreeing that the Church needs new apostles and prophets, but depending on
the Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura), which is the “prophecy” to be told forth.
The Apostles and prophets have already done their part in setting the
foundation and the Church now continues what they have started without
duplicating their office.
Friday, March 8, 2024
Tuesday, February 27, 2024
Thursday, February 1, 2024
Monday, January 22, 2024
Fun and Funny Friday With the Kids!
Friday, December 29, 2023
Questions About Anthropomorphism, Accommodation & Condescension| About Apologetics w/ Dr. L. Tipton
No Copyright infringement intended.
This video belongs to the seminary where I go to and the total intent of sharing this zoom recorded video is to share theological education especially about the topic: Anthropomorphism. In this video, we focused on God's immutability, concepts of Accommodation and Condescension, Contextualization and Incarnation, God's transcendence and immanence, and more.
Dr. Lane Tipton is one of the main personalities in Reformed Forum. Please see their channel as I find their videos very useful for theological studies. Dr. Tipton holds the Charles Krahe Chair of Systematic Theology and is associate professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. He also serves as the pastor of Trinity Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Easton, Pennsylvania.
website: www.reformedforum.org
YT: https://www.youtube.com/@ReformedforumOrg
If you feel like this zoom recording is helpful, I advise that you come to Cambodia for theological studies at Covenant Missions Seminary in Phnom Penh. This seminary is a partner of Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary in Michigan USA. They offer scholarship so if you are being called to study, this is one of the best options to go.
website: www.covenantcambodia.org
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100095729494809
Saturday, December 23, 2023
We are the Reason | Avalon | Christmas Cover | Lanilane
Wednesday, December 13, 2023
My First Foreign Student To Believe in Jesus!
On my way back home today, I was praying to God about my dad back in the Philippines who is sick. My heart was a bit heavy of such thought until I remember my Grade 1 student earlier who received Jesus! I believe that countless angels are celebrating in heaven when the child confessed her belief in Jesus Christ as her Lord and Savior.
Sunday, December 10, 2023
Saturday, December 9, 2023
Blessed Time in Chiang Mai Thailand for the nth Time
It is always a blessing to be in Thailand and for the third time, the Lord gave me the chance to visit Chiang Mai again. By God's grace, I served my sisters in Christ from Legazpi city for their exposure trip and we are grateful for the divine connection with our spiritual family in Thailand. The trip's highlight was the visit to the Karen tribe in northern Thailand. Our sisters were given the chance to introduce Jesus to the tribe, as majority of them if not, all of them have never heard of the name Jesus before. What a blessing! May the Lord continue to open doors and at the same time give us the willing hearts to obey. May we not be discouraged of the persecutions nor the hardship that go along with our desire to preach Jesus especially to the unreached. Glory to the Triune God always.
Saturday, September 23, 2023
Tuesday, August 29, 2023
Worship songs | Inspirational Songs | Medley | Volume 5
• Non-Stop Music | Love Songs | Inspira...
volume 2 - • Non-Stop Music | Love Songs | Inspira...
volume 3 - • Non-Stop Music | Love Songs | Inspira...
volume 4- • Non-Stop Tagalog and English Worship ...
volume 5- • Worship songs | Inspirational Songs |... Saturday, August 5, 2023
You are a Cat Trapped in a Tree
You are a cat trapped in a tree.
You may find yourself being so afraid because of the height. You may feel helpless because you feel alone. You may lose all the strength to find your way back to the ground. But you got to realize that at times, God brings you into a place for a purpose. Some of these are:
1. To let you feel that you are left with no option but to trust in Him. That way you grow in faith more. Realize that it has always been you and God who will make the best team in the many tasks assigned to you.
2. To open your eyes into new perspectives, this time into a new height. Look around and see.
3. To make impact to the ones who see you in that crucial state, moving their hearts to join you in obeying and trusting the Lord no matter the risks.
4. To gain strength and wisdom that you need even though you may say that you have a foot in the grave.
5. To understand that with your strength and mind alone, you cannot make it. But with God, all things are possible when you do things according to His will.
6. To let you understand that your "cat attitude" has to be toned down. Immaturity will not help. You got to humble down and see that you are not the center of it all but God.
So go ahead, enjoy the view, trust, and humble down to the One who knows the way for you. Help will soon come and you will see, that God is good!
------------
Today, I woke up hearing the cry of the street cat I have been feeding for the past weeks. I just met him face to face last night and this happened (I have been feeding this mystery cat by just leaving the food at night for the past weeks- see the story here). I am so anxious about his safety. But I trust the Lord will take care of His creatures. I pray that rescue will come. If only I can climb that tree myself.. But again, I trust the Lord sees the cat and He shows a way..
OUTSOURCED | Full Movie | Intercultural Communication Movie
/ @lanilaneocbina
Instagram & Tiktok: lanilaneocbinaPangarap Kong Magtayo ng Animal Shelter Para sa mga Katulad Nya 🥺😟
Ilang araw kong napapansin na nakatumba palagi ang basurahan tuwing umaga, giving a hint na may pusang gala na nangangalakal sa gabi. So sinubukan kong mag iwan ng pagkain isang gabi. True enough, na consume naman that night ung pagkain at hndi na nakatumba ang basurahan. I did it for a couple of nights and it has become a habit. Isang gabi na curious ako tungkol sa mystery cat at inabangan ko sya. Sobrang saya nung na timingan ko sya! At first intimidated sya at bakas sa mukha nya ang trauma marahil sa kamay ng mga taong galit sa kagaya nya. Paunti unti, napaunlakan naman nya ang alok kong pagkain. A little later I felt his gesture of gratefulness by rubbing his head to the wall and to me and then showing his belly too. Gusto sana nya pumasok sa kwarto kaso hindi pwede. I'm just staying temporarily dito sa Bible school. For now, this is how I can help "xander". Kamuka nya ung dating kong ampon na street cat kaya ayun din ang pinangalan ko. Sana bukas makita ko ulit si Xander ☺️
Monday, July 31, 2023
Tuesday, July 11, 2023
Romans 2 | The Purpose of the Law for Jews and Gentiles | God's Righteousness and Holiness
/ @lanilaneocbina
Instagram & Tiktok: lanilaneocbinaFriday, July 7, 2023
Something in Your Eyes I see... | One Thing I Know | Selah | Cover
God will take away your pain if you choose to let it go... full video: https://youtu.be/iXtFhbPU-qg Blog: http://www.lanilaneocbina.online/ FB Page: https://www.facebook.com/ChibiLanilane youtube: https://www.youtube.com/LanilaneOcbina Instagram & Tiktok: lanilaneocbina
One Thing I know
by Selah
Something in your eyes, I see
Tuesday, May 16, 2023
Wednesday, April 26, 2023
Apart From Him I am Nothing
As a Christian, who is still imperfect and is still under the sanctifying grace of Christ, I am trying my very best to live a Biblical life, as a response to the saving grace and love of our Lord and Savior who is alive in us. My theology (understanding of God) is not based on my own prerogatives nor limited research nor support for the arrogance of some but on the FAITH that God has set in me, which He has purposed to grow and produce fruits. Such faith is rooted from the Scriptures (Canon), carefully read and exegeted. And I believe in God's purpose for us to sow good seeds out of such exegeses that are not watered with arrogance nor pride nor self-righteousness nor any corruption, but with love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness and self-control.
Even if the time comes that I will be the most eloquent or seemingly wisest and most educated (tho I know that's super far from happening), but then I don't have love, I am nothing. It just doesn't make any sense claiming that I am a Christian yet not trying to live out the values demonstrated in the humanity and deity of Christ.
Subjectively, calling myself a Christian is an overstatement because I have a lot of imperfections and so to be called so will seem unjust. But I thank the Lord Jesus because it's not myself who makes me pure, clean, and deserving to be called a Christian but Christ Himself by carrying my sins on that Cross, making me a new creation.
I am a believer, a Christian, who desires to be sanctified by God day by day for apart from Him, I am nothing. Nonetheless, I am a Christian who goes through a noisy world, full of corrupted philosophies and theologies. Good thing we have God, our Father, who is just waiting for us to finally ask for the resolution needed, in His name.
And so we ask the Lord to give us strength and wisdom to be able to defy the toxicity of false faith in this corrupted world. In Jesus' name, amen..
Tuesday, April 4, 2023
SaYo | Lyric Video | Musikatha | Offering Song | Lanilane O.
Monday, April 3, 2023
Tuesday, March 14, 2023
Khmer Rouge | Genocide in Cambodia | Genocide Museum Phnom Penh | Intro Documentary
/ @lanilaneocbina
Instagram & Tiktok: lanilaneocbinaMonday, March 13, 2023
Jeremiah 29:11 | What is God's Plan For You? | Are All People Children of God?
/ @lanilaneocbina
Instagram & Tiktok: lanilaneocbinaTuesday, February 28, 2023
Do Your Trust God Fully? | Proverbs 3:5-6 | Solomon's Wisdom |Preaching | Taglish
Monday, January 23, 2023
Non-Stop Piano Worship Compilation
Friday, January 20, 2023
DOES GOD’S MIND CHANGE?
WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE AND SEMINARY- CAMBODIA
(GOD’S IMMUTABILITY ACCORDING TO CORNELIUS VAN TIL AND OTHERS)
SUBMITTED
TO DR. LANE TIPTON / DR. ROGER KIM
IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
AP
721 APOLOGETICS OF CORNELIUS VAN TIL
FOR MASTER OF THEOLOGY (ThM) PROGRAM
BY
LANILANE
OCBINA
2022
Contents
Introduction
Historical-Biblical Evidences on God’s
Immutability
Biblical References Mistakenly Taken to
Support God’s Mutability
Contemporary Views on God’s Immutability
The Creation-Creature
Relation
Implications of Anthropomorphism
and Anthropopathism
The Absolute, Eternal,
and Infinite God Can Be Known
The
Absolute Triune God and His Image on Creation
The
Incarnation’s Relation to God’s Immutability
Conclusion
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
One Sunday morning during worship and while looking at the faces of
my brothers and sisters, I was wondering if we all are worshipping the same
Jesus in our hearts? Are we picturing the same Messiah in our minds? Some of them
were quite focused on looking at the lyrics of the songs while some solemnly
close their eyes with their lips singing praise and worship to the Lord. Yet I got
very curious about what they were praying for. I can read some faces who were desperately
praying and asking to God, presenting their petitions and hoping for God to
change His mind at some point. And so, I recurrently asked God, “Do you really
change Your mind? If You do, does that make you mutable then?” I was finding
myself heretic by asking such questions but at a certain level, the inquiries
were valid because some people in the church are actually in danger of worshipping
a different “god” and not the God who is infinite, unchanging, and eternal.
There is a great danger in making a different “version” of God and
have Him worshipped in the manner that we want Him to be worshipped in the
church rather than worship Him according to His standards. When we pray to God,
we do not intend to force Him or command Him what to do, making us look superior
and in control of His mind. We cannot hypnotize God and treat Him as mutable as
what some liberal theologians and modernists would. Furthermore, we do not view
God in a pragmatic way for sure.[1]
Whether ontologically or economically reckoned, God is consistent as
He remains absolute and unchanging as the Creator in relation to the humankind
and the world.[2]
Nonetheless, many critical thinkers would always point accounts from the
Scriptures that presents God to be actually changing His mind which are mostly
taken out of context. God’s immutability is consistent throughout the
Scriptures and that is one of the issues that this paper will try to shed light
on.
HISTORICAL-BIBLICAL EVIDENCES TO GOD’S IMMUTABILITY
In the Old Testament, there were various accounts where it was
either explicitly or implicitly expressed that God never changed His mind or was
having regret about His decision. Malachi 3:6 for example says that, “I the
LORD do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.” Also in
Numbers 23:19 said clearly: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of
man, that He should change His mind. Does He speak and then not act? Does He
promise and not fulfill?” 1 Samuel 15:29 also says that “And also the Glory of
Israel will not lie or have regret, for he is not a man, that he should have
regret.” Even all throughout the book of Psalms, God is proclaimed to be firm
in His decisions and in His being the immutable God as: “The counsel of the
Lord stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations” as proclaimed in
Psalm 33:11.[3]
In the New Testament on the other hand, James 1:17 tells us, “Every
good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the
heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.” In Hebrews 13:8,
it says “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” and that He
cannot deny Himself or any of His decisions[4]
having the absolute authority saying about Himself “I am the Alpha and the
Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”[5]
These foregoing passages explicitly describe God to impossibly change because it is contrary to His nature and character. He is not like man who lies, makes promise and not fulfill it. He is true and faithful to His word and not like man who changes like shifting shadows.
BIBLICAL REFERENCES MISTAKENLY TAKEN
TO SUPPORT GOD’S MUTABILITY
Early Christian thinkers, at least during the time of Augustine and Tertullian,
did not have a lot of rejection about the theology of God’s immutability. In spite
of the neo platonic influence in Augustine’s understanding of God, the doctrine
regarding God’s immutability continues to be strongly emphasized in Catholic
theology then. Nonetheless, Tertullian
on the other hand see himself in the same position as Augustine but with
reservations, rejecting the absolute immutability of God later upon arguing
with Marcion.[6]
There are many accounts in the Scriptures that explicitly showed God's
changeable and dramatic emotional connection in the dealings of His people. There
were times when He repents His former deed like when He regretted creating
humanity after seeing how sinful they became, which has led to wiping out all
of humanity in Noah’s flood. God also seemed to change His mind because of
conditional actions such as when King Hezekiah asked for a longer life[7]
and also when He did not destroy Nineveh, making Jonah feel so upset.[8]
God also became angry over Israel with wrathful judgment many times and then
later embrace her with so much love and forgiveness, having compassion like a
mother to His beloved children.
Most of the error on the concept of God’s mutability is due to the
careless interpretation of God’s “emotions” and “actions” and then having the tendency
to correlate such to God’s creation. This paints a picture of having the
infinite, eternal and unchangeable God share a sort of “third party”[9]
with the finite, temporal, and changing creation.
After Adam fell into rebellion against God in Genesis 6, The Lord
was said to “grieve”[10]
that He has made man and that His heart was filled with “pain”. Some criticize
the Bible and God using this account and more by describing God as an
underachiever Creator who changes His mind and regrets His actions.
Errors on these matters have been addressed by contemporary theologians
like Cornelius Van Til, who exhaustively explicated important concepts such as
Anthropomorphism and further provided sufficient reasons why God, the Absolute
Creator, is immutable while still relating to the temporal world that is mutable.
Furthermore, such errors also rest on the conflict with reconciling the
immutability and impassability of God with the premises of the doctrine of the
Triune God.
CONTEMPORARY VIEWS ON GOD’S IMMUTABILITY
The doctrine of God's immutability has been generally accepted
mostly on the basis of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures. Even some modern theologians
such as Karl Barth[11]
would agree to the divine immutability of God although he speaks of the modern
idea of God as a limiting or border rather than constitutive[12].
Nonetheless, many are still knowingly and unknowingly denying divine immutability’s
being foundational in the Christian belief as it has not developed in great
detail until the recent years. Hence, because of the unsound treatment of the
knowledge about God's immutability especially in the past two hundred years of
debates, the contemporary Christian Church is currently facing a doctrinal
crisis. Many churches unknowingly worship different “gods” during services.
The enemy has done and has been supporting false doctrines in the
church and these should be addressed aggressively today. Although there may be
enough evidences in the Scriptures about God's immutability, there has come a
dilemma on particular matters such as reconciling this attribute of God along with
another that is called impassibility with the reality of the Incarnation[13].
Because of this, many churches today have a dual conception of God.
The knowledge about God being immutable and transcendent posed
particular difficulties in the clarity of the affirmation of the Word Himself
as per John 1:1-14[14].
"How is God the Creator suddenly "shifts" His divine nature to
human nature?" has been a very challenging question especially in the
Sunday-level teachings in Christian churches. Once this dual conception of God
is addressed unsoundly in such level, it will branch out into false teachings
and comprehension of who God is, leading to the unbiblical view of God and
worship of a different god. Hence, going back to the question “does God change His
mind?”, most members of the congregation are strayed from the doctrinal truth while
praying earnestly and thinking that they are praying to a God who changes His
mind according to their prayers.[15]
The Roman catholic church maintains the same view with the Protestant theology when it comes to the idea of God as a constitutive concept but problems may originate from the catechism connected to their doctrine of concupiscence that roots from the accounts of the Creation in the book of Genesis. Man’s inclination to sin and not being totally disposed to the will of God has made him partly independent of God instead of totally disposed to God. Hence, for the Roman catholic theology, man is making his ultimate reference point no longer exclusively found in God.[16] Such doctrine of concupiscence and partly independence of God can be reflected to the general standpoint of the Roman catholic when it comes to authority: the Bible and church (tradition). Oftentimes, the authority is more from the church rather than the Scriptures.[17] The magisterium of the Roman catholic reflects the necessity of works and man’s contribution to his salvation, rather than man’s total dependence on Christ’s work alone. Hence, there is confusion for the Roman catholic especially in the idea that people can change the mind of God by their works be it in the act of charity, praying the rosary, penitence, and monetary offering to the church. On another note, the belief about the existence of purgatory quite resembles the Roman catholic’s defective theology of sin in relation to the image of God and original righteousness. The idea of purgatory almost introduces a god that is mutable and not self-sufficient to redeem the sinners through His work on the Cross alone and that God’s justice is flawed.
The Creation-Creature
Relation
Cornelius Van Til’s reformed view of God’s immutability is rooted
from his transcendental approach[18]
to the incomprehensibility of God, that the mind of man is made for the reception
of God’s revelation.[19]
“…the capacities of the human mind would have no opportunity for
their exercise except upon the presupposition that the most absolute God does
exist and that all things in this world are revelational of him. We grant that
it is only by the frank acceptance of the Scriptures as the infallible
revelation of God that man can know this. But this only shows that unless one
thus accepts the Scripture there is no place for the exercise of reason. The
most absolute God of the Confession can only be presupposed. He cannot be
proved to exist in the way that the idea of proof is taken by the
Romanist-Arminian apologetics. But so far from this fact being unfortunate, it
is the one thing that saves the idea of the reasonableness of the Christian
religion.”[20]
Man cannot help but know God. In
contrast with the Romanist and Modern theologians who concedes to the principle
of man’s incapable of knowing God, Reformed theology stresses on the inescapable
character of the revelation of God.
Through the proofs in the Scriptures,
we comprehend that God is a covenant God who does not change and remain
faithful to His will from Genesis to Revelation. Moreover, the immutability of
God is related to His aseity. There is enough to prove God’s aseity that in His
existence and essence, He gives and act out of His fullness while there is
nothing to add to Him nor remove from Him. He is all sufficient and autonomous
in His will and being. Augustine said that such self-contained fullness of the
divine being of God results to His immutability.[21]
Van Til stresses the self-completeness of the Triune God related to
His immutability as well. He conferred to the Westminster Confession saying:
The Son of God,
the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance
and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon
Him man's nature, with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof,
yet without sin; being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of
the virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct
natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one
person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very
God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.[22]
According to Van Til, there should
be no confusion between the relation of God and man as per this statement.[23]
The self-complete ontological Triune God is the foundation of His created
universe and not the other way around as what other views would say such as deism
(as Nestorianism) and pantheism (as Eutychianism), which are two forms that
uphold confusion of the eternal and the temporal.[24]
The Triune God gets involved in the
dynamism of mutability of creatures without seizing to be who He is.[25]
He remains to be the Absolute Creator God who does not change as He condescends
to relate to the creatures, who on the other hand change. The eternal God does
not change as He relates with the temporal creatures in contrast to what the pantheists
believe and also, He is able to reveal Himself to the creatures through His
divine providence in distinction to what the deists believe.
The change that we are talking about
is in ethical aspect of God’s being. In
1 John 4 it is said that God is love which teaches us that God is infinite and
in His attribute of love, we do not speak merely of Him feeling love in
fluctuating levels but rather, He is love in infinite measure. God cannot be
limited or bounded in love because He Himself is love. This is why God is impassible,
that He is love in infinite degree, eternally, immutably, and self-sufficiently
from the created order.
There are changes around about God and in the relation of things around Him but God remains God in all His absoluteness. I agree with Van Til when he asserted that “the Scriptures speak anthropomorphically of God, and could not do otherwise, but for all that, God, in Himself, is immutable.”[26]
Anthropomorphism
and Anthropopathism
In the church, especially in the
Sunday-school level discipleship, many will concede to the difficulty of
reconciling God’s impassability and the truth about Anthropomorphism and Anthropopathism.
God, not being bounded by emotion (impassable), has condescended to approach
human in earthly language and character (anthropomorphism and anthropopathism).
God is described in the Bible as
having the physical attributes of man such as the following:
1.
… the Lord will make “His face”
to shine on you (Numbers 6:25);
2.
He “sets [his] face” against
evil (Leviticus 20:6);
3.
He “stoops down to look on the
heavens and the earth” (Psalm 113:6).
4.
He “stretched out his hand”
(Exodus 7:5; Isaiah 23:11), and God scattered enemies with His strong arm
(Psalm 89:10).
5.
He “keeps his eye” on the land
(Deuteronomy 11:12), the “eyes of the Lord” are on the righteous (Psalm 34:15),
and the earth is His “footstool” (Isaiah 66:1).
These and more do not necessarily say that God literally has eyes, hands,
feet, and face, as God is Spirit and not flesh and blood.[27]
On another hand, we are living in flesh and so such anthropomorphisms help us
to understand God’s nature and actions.
In contrast with the concept of anthropomorphism there are some
positions that rejects the possibility of knowing and understanding God. Van
Til did not like what modern theologians say about the incomprehensibility of
God as standing against the view of anthropomorphism.[28]
For the modernists, the Bible is totally human words and thus it cannot make
contact with God. But Van Til treated by using the concept of God’s eternality
as according to these philosophers, “God's eternality cannot mean anything
other than ‘a very long process of time’ to us, and a god who is very old is
not the absolute God of the Bible.”[29]
The same way that Van Til thought against the concept of modernists
about the incomprehensibility of God, he also did not agree with the Romanists
who do not include the human mind within the scope of revelation since it does
not take the Creator-creature distinction seriously and that the knowledge of
God is not innate.[30]
Nonetheless, Van Til has been misunderstood of being in agreement with idealism
of some sort as Kantian and Hegelian[31]
because of the innate knowledge when actually, his concept that is delicately predicated
from a transcendental approach should be clearly understood. His transcendental
and not logical approach on the self-sufficiency of God stresses the meaning of
human experience and operation based from the sovereign design of God in the human
mind. These strongly suffice the argument over the views of modernists and
Romanists regarding the incomprehensibility of God.
The Absolute, Eternal, and Infinite God Can Be Known
The understanding about anthropomorphism is very critical along with
the conception about anthropopathism, which is the attribution of human emotions
to God such as when “the Lord regretted” (Genesis 6:6) , when God “grieved” (Isaiah
54:6), and so forth.
Van Til set a rhetorical question of “how it is possible that man
should say anything at all about a God who is infinite, eternal and unchangeable
in all his perfections.”[32]
What Romanists and some modernists attempted to resolve is the difficulty of this
question in many ways including those of Plato’s and Descartes’ innate knowledge
concept, which Van Til also seemed to assert in his concept about the human
mind. However, unlike Plato and Descartes, Van Til stresses such innate knowledge
to be ultimately springing up from God, to whom man is totally dependent of.
I
would agree with Van Til’s view negating Plato’s and Descartes’ concept. It is true
that each human has his own mind and decision but I do not think that anyone is
totally independent from God at any circumstances since it is given that man’s
innermost inclination is toward God and he cannot help but know God. Man is
totally disposed to God since the creation and until today, in spite of living
in a fallen world, our minds do not operate in separation from the mind of God.[33]
In this we have the presupposition of the Creator-creature distinction as
Calvin also says, the consciousness of man and the consciousness of God is
involved in each other and that the former is completely dependent on the
latter.[34]
This is primarily against the concepts of Roman catholic and Modernists that
consistently argue that man and God are co-workers in doing changes in the universe.
Man is only in participation and not in cooperation with God when talking about
the changes being done in the world or the universe per se.[35]
The claim that the mind of man is designed to understand God’s revelation can prove that God can be known and that intimate relationship and worship of Him is possible. And the way God relates to man will require Him to accommodate Himself to man through anthropomorphism. This compels us to look at the Creator-creation connection under the lens of anthropomorphism.
The Absolute
Triune God and His Image on Creation
Geerhardus Vos argues that creation is
a “transitive act” that occurs in time but with the Creator God on the other
hand, qualitatively and ontologically there is “no time distinction” that exists.[36]
Vos quoting Voetius:
Creation actively considered, is not a real change because by it God
is not changed by that act; it only requires a new relationship of the Creator
to what is created. And this new relation, which is not real in God, can therefore
not effect a real change in Him.[37]
The relation that happens to be new
to man is not new to God because nothing can be new to God. Being an Absolute
God, He is not bound by anything be it time, space, condition and so forth. God
relates to His creation, the world, as the absolute triune Creator to whom the
word “change” can never be attributed to. Perhaps a different idea of “god” can
change but to an Absolute Creator-God, that word never applies.
The word change can only apply to the
temporal creation of God. Even though man is created in the image of God, it
does not mean that we are an exact replica of the Creator-Triune God. The
comparison is analogical and not equivocal. Man is a psychosomatic unit that
represents God’s communicable attributes alone and this is how God has created
man.
Man is created in God’s image and
was given freewill. Now if man rests in God, his soul will correspond to the
destiny that God has originally designed for him.[38]
Dr. Tipton says:
… “destiny” is movement from life in communion with God in earthly
Eden (innocency) to the consummation of that life in communion with God in
heaven (glory). Intrinsic to the image of God, essential to its nature, is this
dynamic, eschatologically oriented, communion bond that consists in life in
fellowship with the absolute, triune God.[39]
I would agree with Dr. Tipton as such
destiny should not necessarily find us always shortsighted about all the contemporary
changes that happens because it is also necessary to view God’s absoluteness in
a farsighted manner from the creation to the final consummation. In addition, understanding
why specific “shifts of mind” in God’s part did not necessarily mean that He is
a God who changes because all of the things that happened complement to His
grandeur plan.
It is difficult to accept the Roman view
on the image of God because of the externalist treatment of the concept. For this
semi-pelagian standpoint that denies total depravity of man, it is hard to
achieve the eschatological end of the essence of religion that is the communion
bond with God.[40] Tipton quotes Vos:
In the Roman catholic view, man can only lose what is not essential to
him, namely the supernaturally added gifts, the dona superaddita.
Because of his fall, these are lost. The essence of man, the imago,
consisting in formal existence as spirit, in the liberum arbitrium
(freedom of the will), remained. Because, however, there was no inner
connection between similitudo and the imago, the removal of the
former cannot essentially change the latter. The liberum arbitrium might
be weakened a little; in reality it is unharmed. In other words, by loosening
the moral powers from the will, from the capacity of the will, and by denying
that the former are natural in man, Rome has in principle appropriated the
Pelagian conception of the will as liberum arbitrium. That capacity of
free will has remained, and with that the possibility that man, even after the
fall, can do something good.[41]
With the implication of Roman view
on the image of God to the eschatological end of the essence of religion, it is
not possible to reconcile and identify the image of God and original
righteousness, which only the Reformed view affirms. Tipton quoting Vos about the
deeper Protestant conception says that “the image does not exist only in correspondence
with God but in being disposed toward God.”[42]
Hence after the fall, man was in his total depravity state and totally inclined
against God, blinded by sin. Nonetheless, such change in man’s state does not change
God, who remains to be the center of all things (Colossians 1 and so forth) and
so man remains to not able to help but know God in his deepest sense.
The fall was not about how worse man has become but how man cannot do
enough good to save himself. Also, no matter how man gets to know God, there is
no possibility to total reconciliation and so in order for that to be solved,
God the Son has to be sent in flesh to pay the total and not just the partial
price. The incarnation and salvific work of Jesus on the cross was not
necessary if the Roman catholic is right about man having a contribution for
his salvation through his works.
The Incarnation’s Relation to God’s Immutability
Did Jesus’ coming into flesh make
him mutable like all creations? The Arians[43]
and its spiritual heirs like Jehovah’s witnesses, Mormons and a huge group in
my country called Iglesia ni Cristo believe so. If we find approval on the standpoint
of the Arians in the Christological controversy or Trinitarian controversy per
se over the years, the whole essence of God including His immutability is
damaged. Arianism is fatal.
While the Scriptures give proof
about the full humanity of Christ,[44]
the full divinity of Christ is rightly asserted as well. In John 1:1 and other
passages, Jesus’ divinity is implied by showing Him performing actions that
only God can do such as judging humanity, forgiving sin, calming the storm, healing
people, feeding the thousands, creating the cosmos, resurrecting from the dead,
and so forth.
When “the Word became flesh”[45]
Jesus did not split into two having one part to be God and one part to be man. He
became one Person with two distinct natures. He was of a fully divine nature
and a fully human nature. As the author of Hebrews said, Jesus entered a union
with sinless human nature in a physical body.[46]
With these distinct natures, Jesus’ divine nature is immutable and Jesus’ human
nature is mutable. This mystery is hard to totally understand but its beauty
presents the divine sovereignty and power of God that has led to the salvation
of God’s elect.
Liberals and Modernists have different views of the incarnation and
the whole Christ event. For Barth, the Christ event is an event within God’s “own
life”, that is an eternally fulfilled “becoming” in God himself wherein God
becomes man in order to participate in God in all eternity.[47]
Barth’s view of “eternity” is different as he asserts it to be God’s beginning
and end, thus making God bounded by time and all these events in God’s time
(that He takes for human) he calls Geschichte. With such philosophy,
Barth limits God and renders the universe sovereign over him.
As Barth treats the Christ event as the time where God and man
converge and having the incarnation equal to reconciliation, he tends to teach
that all people are already included in Jesus Christ and this becomes the only venue
of God’s election and judgment. As Barth emphasized Geschichte as “God’s
time for us,” Jesus Christ is both God’s act of self-revelation to man and the
reconciliation between God and humanity. This objective reconciliation of all
people to God leads to universalism.
Liberal theology basically presents a different god who is stuck in
time that is of this world’s imperfect and superficial human consciousness. Modern
theologians as Barth[48]
however released God from this trap and make Him utterly and completely
transcendent. Van Til and Barth both agree that God is transcendent but the
conflict starts with Barth’s holding of the Geschichte as the constituting
event that renders God as a Triune God, which is in conflict with Van Til’s
position that the self-contained Creator-Triune God is not dependent on
creation nor on any event (Geschichte or Historie) as He exists outside
all of these.[49]
There is no beginning nor end in God’s being a Triune God because He exists outside
time, in contrast to Barth’s view.
On the one hand, Barth presents a mutable god who exists under the sovereignty
of the universe and being dependent on creation. Van Til, on the other hand, asserts
God to be the immutable Creator-Triune God over all mutable creations who exist
under His sovereign will and power. The god that Barth is presenting appears to
be an underachiever god who is inferior to the universe or the creation per se.
God is instead the ultimate authority and sovereignty over all creations and He
does not change even though the mutable universe does.
The incarnation should also not be viewed as God’s way of
contextualizing to reach out to man through a certain mode as modalism[50]
presents. God did not come in flesh to be in the God the Son mode and then
resurrected to move on as God the Holy Spirit mode. It does not make sense
having God to switch among His three different manifestations whether one at a
time or all three at the same time, which is the error of Monarchianism[51].
There is only one God[52] who is of three persons[53] and this mystery and truth will always be inconceivable to the human mind. The Scripture however is plain: God is in three co-eternal, co-equal Persons. Jesus prayed to the Father (Luke 22:42) and now sits on the right hand of the Father in heaven (Hebrews 1:3). The Father and the Son sent the Spirit into the world (John 14:26; 15:26). The Scriptures rejects the idea of modalism because it attacks the very nature of God.
CONCLUSION
The total understanding of God in His absolute character and state
is ultimately a mystery beyond our ability to comprehend. If we say that we understand
Him completely, then we are deceived. Our limited brain can only understand a
small portion of His totality. Yet we are called to continuously know Him and
make progress in our relationship with Him.
As we worship our great and amazing God privately or corporately in
the church, it is important that we are making progress on knowing who He
really is. If we truly worship the living God, we will see ourselves in a path
of growth in His knowledge and being in that path means that at one point, we
will realize that He is indeed an immutable God. He never changes His mind just
because one says so. He cannot be manipulated at any degree.
God never changes because He is absolute. He is eternal and not bounded
by anything such as time and space. He is sovereign over all things hence every
creature on earth rests under His lordship. Those who believe and follow Him
will enter His Kingdom and those who will not choose Him will take the downward
destination. There is always that waiting reality at the finish line and we are
to think eschatologically as we participate in God’s work in this world. The
essence of being a child of God is sticking with Him and progressing in the
calling that He has set for each of us.
For us who are called heavenward, we need to understand that God has
a great plan and all things about our destination is already known by Him.
Before we pray, He already knows what is in our hearts. Hence, we cannot say
that we have the ability to change God’s plan through our prayers. The fact is,
when we grow in our relationship with God, we get to learn to pray in His
Spirit. When we pray, the Holy Spirit ministers to us and lead our prayers
according to His will. The issue is not about the content of our prayer but the
relationship with God that backs it up.
Praying should not be taken normally as an activity of asking God
for things to happen in a superficial manner. Rather, it is our act of serving
God (Luke 2:36-38) and obeying Him since it is His command for us to pray (Philippians
4:6-7). Nonetheless, this does not mean
that we do not ask from God at all. God has promised that He will give us what
we ask for given that we ask in accordance with His will (1 John 5:14-15). Jesus
had the perfect demonstration as fully human when it comes to praying. He taught
us that we may have our own desires but we should long and ask for the will of God
to be done ultimately.
God’s will remains to be ultimate. Hence our prayers do not have
power if they are not according to God’s will. We do not have the power to
change God’s mind but we experience His power when we are lead to the right
prayer and see His great work unfold before us as we pray in Spirit whether it
appears that He changed His mind or not.
Every child of God is called to discern His will. As we pray, we exercise
our faith and trust in God and His Word. We trust that our God, who never
changes, will still bring about changes in this world for the good of those who
love and obey Him until the final consummation. God is not the one who changes,
the temporal world does under His sovereign will.
The creator triune absolute God keeps His elect ready for the final
consummation by having them conformed to His likeness while persevering and remaining
in His divine will. From our present sanctification process to the final state
called glorification, let us then keep knowing the God of the Bible and worship
Him according to His truth.
My personal desire is to see my home church and definitely every part of the body of Christ worship the same God and not the different “versions” of gods that are taught by fatal philosophies and self-centered teachings. I am praying that the Holy Spirit continues to lead us all to the right understanding of God who is eternal, infinite, and unchanging. And I believe this prayer is according to His will for the elect.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barth,Karl. Church
Dogmatics. Westminster John Knox Press, 1932.
Van Til, Cornelius.
An Introduction to Systematic Theology. P&R Publishing Company, 2007.
Van Til, Cornelius.
Christianity and Barthianism. Presbyterian & Reformed Pub Co, 2004.
Van Til, Cornelius.
Christianity and Idealism. Literary Licensing, LLC, 1955.
Vos, Geerhardus.
Reformed Dogmatics. New Horizons, 2018.
Articles:
The Westminster
Shorter Catechism's definition of God
Robert H. Avers,
"Tertulliano Paradox", Expository Times. 1976.
Dr. Lane Tipton,
“Vos’ Reformed Dogmatics”, New Horizons, 2018.
Online sources:
http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0160-0220,_Tertullianus,_Adversus_Marcionem_[Schaff],_EN.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509454
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/arianism-2
Videos:
Reformed Forum
videos, Dr. Lane Tipton.
Q&A Videos with
Dr. Lane Tipton.
[1] Because Pragmatism
implies that the world created God (instead of the other way around) and that
the temporal world is said to be a wider concept than God, putting God in a
position of being a creation rather than the Absolute Creator. Van Til,
Cornelius, Christianity and Idealism, p.133-139.
[2] We are speaking here
in the light of the “Strong immutability” definition of Divine immutability
over the “weak immutability”.
[3] Also in Psalm 41:13; Psalm
90:2-4; John 17:5; 2 Timothy 1:9
[4] 2 Timothy 2:13 “If we
are faithless, he remains faithful— for he cannot deny himself.”
[6] Tertullian seemed to approve
the concept of God’s immutability until he was drawn into a conclusion that God
has personal feelings (not in the contemporary concept of anthropopathism later).
In his argument with Marcion, he stated that God is mutable and passible. Robert
H. Avers, "Tertulliano Paradox," Expository Times. 1976. pp308-311.
Online source: http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0160-0220,_Tertullianus,_Adversus_Marcionem_[Schaff],_EN.pdf
[7] 2 Kings 20:5-6, “When Hezekiah pleaded that his life would be
prolonged, the Lord said, "I will heal thee: . . . And I will add unto thy
days fifteen years. . . ."
[8] Jonah 3: 10, “When God
saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did
not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.”
[9] In Barth’s correlativism,
God and man come to participate in a common third thing leading to their unity
in a process of reciprocal becoming and development over time. The error is the
idea of having a mutable god so as to participate in the relationship with man.
Source: Reformed Forum video, Dr. Lane Tipton, Week 3.
[10] In KJV, the translation
for “grieve” is “repented” and in NASB and ESV, the word used was “sorry”. The
Hebrew word though was “sigh” which meant to breathe strongly, to pity, or be
sorry. It was part of the expression called anthropomorphism, which C. Van Til gave
an exhaustive explanation about.
[11] Barth,Karl. Church Dogmatics IV.1, trans. G. W.
Bromiley (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956), 561.
“God is in Himself the living God,
that His eternal being of and by Himself has not to be understood as a being
which is inactive because of its pure deity, but as a being which is supremely
active in a positing of itself which is eternally new. His immutability is not
a holy immobility and rigidity, a divine death, but the constancy of His
faithfulness to Himself continually reaffirming itself in freedom. His unity and
uniqueness are not the poverty of an exalted divine isolation, but the richness
of the one eternal origin and basis and essence of all fellowship. The fact
that according to His revelation God is the triune God means that He is in
Himself the living God.”.
[12] Van Til, Cornelius,
An Introduction to Systematic Theology. P&R Publishing Company, 2007. P.155. Protestant theology (and Roman
catholic) maintains that the idea of God is not merely limiting but rather a
constitutive concept. Barth maintains that man can know nothing about the most
Absolute God.
[13] Because the Incarnate
Christ had emotions as fully human.
[14] John 1:1 (NIV), “In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God” , John 1:14 (NIV) “The Word
became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory
of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth..”
[15] The truth is, when we
pray, we are the ones being changed by God according to His divine will. This
was what Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane has demonstrated to us when praying.
(Luke 22:42).
[16] Van Til, An Introduction
to Systematic Theology. P.156.
[17] The Vatican II maintains
that the doctrine is immutable and such doctrine is set by the footprints of
the ancient tradition. Online source: https://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01051997_p-21_en.html
[18] Van Til’s transcendental
approach is quite antithetical to Kant’s transcendental idealism. Source:
Video from Reformed Forum, Dr. Lane Tipton, week eight. Also from Christianity
and Idealism, Chapters 2 to 9.
[19] Ibid.
[20][20][20] Van Til, An Introduction
to Systematic Theology. P.158.
[21] Ibid, 207. Augustine’s theology about immutability is strongly
in contrast with Aristotle’s principle that “the immutability of the divine
being was due to its emptiness and internal immobility.”
[22] Westminster Confession,
Chapter 8.
[23] Ibid, 208.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid. Not as Barth’s
way of having correlativized ontological Trinity and all the incommunicable
attributes.
[26] Ibid, 208.
[27] The Westminster Shorter Catechism's definition of God (Q.4): “God
is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power,
holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” Online source: https://www.apuritansmind.com/westminster-standards/shorter-catechism/
[28] Van Til, Introduction to Systematic Theology, p.159
[29] Ibid.
[30] Dr. Lane Tipton says in his article that the “Roman Catholic view
is not merely externalist in its theology of creation; it is defective in its
theology of sin.” This is because of the externally added (donum superadditum)
gift or grace that confers original righteousness enabling man to have fellowship
with God. Dr. Lane Tipton in his article, “Vos’ Reformed Dogmatics,
New Horizons, 2018. P. 10.
[31] Video #8, Dr. Lane
Tipton, 8-1_idealism_and_realism.mp4
[32] Ibid, Ch 13.
[33] As Van Til strongly stresses G. Vos’ standpoint about man being in
the image of God in RD 2:13 where he says “above all that he (man) is disposed
for communion with God, that all the capacities of His soul can act in a way that
corresponds to their destiny only if they rest in God”. Geerhardus Vos. Reformed
Dogmatics, Volume 2, p.13.
[34] Online source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509454
[35] In understanding this,
we should reckon with the error of universalism. Yes man cannot help but know
God but some (the reprobate) will come to the status of knowing God yet not
choosing God.
[36] Geerhardus Vos. Reformed Dogmatics, trans.and ed. Richard
B. Gaffin Jr, et al. Volume 1. WA: Lexham, 2014-2016) P.177. Also discussed by
Dr. Lane Tipton in his article, “Vos’ Reformed Dogmatics, New Horizons, 2018. P.
9.
[37] Ibid. p. 178.
[38] Geerhardus Vos. Reformed Dogmatics, Volume 2, p.13.
[39] Dr. Lane Tipton in his article, “Vos’ Reformed Dogmatics, New
Horizons, 2018. P. 10.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Ibid.
[42] Ibid. p.11.
[43] Arianism views that Jesus is a finite created being with some
divine attributes. According to this view, Jesus is not eternal and not divine
in and of Himself. It is named after Arius, a priest and false teacher in the
early fourth century AD in Alexandria, Egypt. He was later called out by theologians
like Athanasius who later influenced the proclamation of Jesus’ deity in the
Nicene creed in 325 that is later confirmed at the Council of Constantinople in
381. Online source: https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/arianism-2
[44] Jesus being able to
suffer, die, and experience weaknesses, both physical and emotional.
[45] John 1:14
[46] Hebrews 10:5, Consequently,
when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have
not desired, but a body have you prepared for me…
[47] Cornelius Van Til, Christianity_and_Barthianism.
Presbyterian & Reformed Pub Co, 2004. PP.1-114.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Ibid, pp.13-29.
[50] Many critics’ view
commit Barth to some form of modalism based from his doctrine of the trinity in
his Church Dogmatics.
[51] Monarchianism claims that the Logos of God has no separate,
personal existence of its own. The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are only
different names for the same Person, according to the Monarchian. The simplest
example of this is the Oneness theology of some groups.
[52] Deuteronomy 6:4, ““Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.”
[53] Matthew 28:19, "Go therefore and make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit"