Imperishable Inheritance

I'm right now pondering so many thoughts I couldn't possibly write an article on each one so I thought I'd just touch on each one. Some of these are directly doctrinal issues and some non-direct.

The Trinity

Yes, I've decided to study a little on the Trinity. It's a topic I believe and find no reason to question on the basis of Scripture, but I find it increasingly important to understand what the Trinity is for my Muslim ministry. Also, I think it's important to be able to verbalize the doctrine of the Trinity no matter how difficult it may be. Here is the classical, deductive argument I've used in the past; but I've decided to expand upon the amount of Scripture utilized in my argument.

1. The Father is God (John 8:41; Galatians 1:1), The Son is God (Isaiah 7:14, 9:6-7; John 1:1, 8:58, 20:28; Colossians 2:19), The Holy Spirit is God (Matthew 28:19; Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 2:11, 3:16).
2. God is one (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 44:6; Mark 12:29; 1 Corinthians 8:4).
3. Therefore, God is Triune.

And this I suppose to be that blessed Trinity that we read of in the Holy Scriptures. The Father is the Deity subsisting in the prime, unoriginated and most absolute manner, or the Deity in its direct existence. The Son is the Deity generated by God's understanding, or having an idea of Himself and subsisting in that idea. The Holy Ghost is the Deity subsisting in act, or the Divine essence flowing out and breathed forth in God's Infinite love to and delight in Himself. And I believe the whole Divine essence does truly and distinctly subsist both in the Divine idea and Divine love, and that each of them are properly distinct Persons.
Jonathan Edwards, Valiant for the Truth¹

Now, this seems pretty straight forward, but this issue is quite complex as we discuss the non-detachment of three self-existent beings (Perichoresis), substance (Homoousion) vs. essence (Ontology), and so forth. It is also important to understand the heresies regarding the Trinity to understand the doctrine of the Trinity better (it helps to look at what is not right to see what is right). Below is a list of further readings.

1. The Trinity, by Bob Burridge
2. Statement of the Doctrine [Trinity], by Loraine Boettner
3. A Comparison of Islamic and Trinitarian Monotheism (Highly Suggest)
4. Monergism.com: The Trinity

Four Views on Divine Foreknowledge

I'm currently reading the book corresponding to this title, and I must say that it probably one of the worst books I've read thus far in my Christian doctrinal studies (Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism is close though). It's bad because when I read the book, I walk away and the two views that make the most sense are the Open-Theistic and Molinistic viewpoint.

I'm seriously convinced that Dave Hunt is a waste of human flesh as a theologian. He does not use 1, not even 1, passage of Scripture in his whole argument! Paul Helm, presenting the Classical (Augustinian) view, also does a terrible job in presenting the case. If I didn't already understand it, I would not have gotten anything out of reading his article. He also used little Scripture.

Greg Boyd does the best job in presenting his view and also responding to the other viewpoints (each viewpoint has a chance to respond to the other). I'm convinced that Boyd, by his extensive use of rhetorical questions and framework for his writings, is not trying to convince others but more-so himself. I even got this impression reading "God of the Possible." He also had the most Scripturally saturated argument by far.

William Lang Craig wrote a fantastic article on middle knowledge. I can honestly say that I understand that view now. He explained the variance between the view that came from the Dominican and Jesuit orders, and he also explains his philosophy very well. His use of Scripture was also less than adequate; in fact, none of his proof texts validated his philosophy (it seems as though he uses the occasional text to keep Scripture in his argument). I now understand natural, free, counterfactual, and middle knowledge. Most importantly, it was interesting to see how "middle" refers to being between natural (knowing what "could be") and free (what "will" be); in my first article I explained middle knowledge as being between the open view and classical view. Although that is not technically correct (as an application of the various views on the knowledge utilized), it most certainly can be used as an analogy to explain what the "middle" refers to. He also has an interesting chart where he displays God's knowledge coming logically two instances before His divine creation decree.

1. Sees all possible worlds.
2. Sees all feasible worlds.
3. Divine creation decree.
4. Foreknowledge set.

So, I'll finish the book; but I keep jumping around, because my interest keeps waining in the authors. I want to read a book on church government, views on apologetics, and maybe Piper's hedonism book.

Communication Between Men and Women

"Gender diffrences. Men. Women. Is it truly this difficult for us to tune into what the opposite sex wants from us? And if so, how on earth do people get married? I applaude louder and louder those couples who have been together 30, 40, 50 years. Such an accomplishment in a world that handles divorce like failed driving tests; practice, maybe try a few other cars and their steering, read the manual harder and in a few months try again."
Leslie Zate

This has always been a soft spot in my intellectual inquiries. Even though I love talking about this issue, and pertaining issues, I've left it for a while. I put in the back burner. Maybe because I'm not in a relationship, but even as my last relationship was dying I was moving away from this inquiry.

It seems as my interest in someone comes to fruition: I come back to it. Now, it is something I ponder quite a bit, but it becomes an emphasis when I wonder how to correctly portray my feelings and ideas to another woman. It becomes this seemingly impossible challenge that I never seem to successfully complete.

I've had the opportunity to dialogue with a few women recently on this subject (and might I add talking to a Christian woman is exponentially more rewarding than a secular woman). Topics now come up that concern a woman such as spiritual leadership, respect, lack of passivity, and open communication to name a few. These are great attributes to be looking for in a man, and unfortunately so many Christian men today (in their nominal Christian lives) fail to embrace these attributes. I know specifically because I saw it—and continue to see it—in my father.

Relating to the quote above, I saw at an ordination ceremony Jim Schindler get ordained and his wife Rochelle spoke words of encouragement. They have been together for 47 years! She spoke encouragement in such a respectful, loving, and Godly tone. Jim cried, and it touched me to the core. These things take on more meaning to me seeing my parents give up and get divorced recently. And now my father is dating again, and I've watched my mother become destroyed over it.

Much going on in the head.