1
00:00:02,680 --> 00:00:07,400
Speaker 1: Life Audio. All right, friends, I think we're live here

2
00:00:07,440 --> 00:00:10,280
Speaker 1: on Talbot Tuesday with doctor Fred Sanders to talk about

3
00:00:10,280 --> 00:00:13,280
Speaker 1: the Trinity. Although you're not technically a Talbot, you're a

4
00:00:13,320 --> 00:00:16,680
Speaker 1: Biola professor, but you are, I'm going to say, one

5
00:00:16,680 --> 00:00:20,120
Speaker 1: of the world renowned experts on the Trinity. So we're

6
00:00:20,160 --> 00:00:22,680
Speaker 1: bringing me on. You're ready to talk all things Trinity.

7
00:00:22,760 --> 00:00:25,560
Speaker 2: Ready to talk Trinity and Talbot friendly Talbot, a jaysent

8
00:00:25,600 --> 00:00:26,320
Speaker 2: and glad to be here.

9
00:00:26,480 --> 00:00:29,120
Speaker 1: Totally agree. Now, just tell us really quickly, what got

10
00:00:29,160 --> 00:00:33,400
Speaker 1: you into studying the Trinity? Of all areas of study

11
00:00:33,400 --> 00:00:33,960
Speaker 1: you could have.

12
00:00:34,800 --> 00:00:36,680
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it goes way back to not long

13
00:00:36,720 --> 00:00:39,440
Speaker 2: after my conversion as a teenager. I just was reading

14
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:41,320
Speaker 2: the Bible for myself and trying to make sense of

15
00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:43,440
Speaker 2: the things we say in church and the things we hear.

16
00:00:43,520 --> 00:00:45,320
Speaker 2: And I got saved to a Methodist church, so I

17
00:00:45,400 --> 00:00:47,560
Speaker 2: had Wesley Hyms in my head and just trying to

18
00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:49,760
Speaker 2: put it all together. And I just read the Bible

19
00:00:49,800 --> 00:00:52,640
Speaker 2: and thought, the only way this works is if God

20
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:55,400
Speaker 2: eternally exists as father son in spirit. I mean I

21
00:00:55,560 --> 00:00:57,520
Speaker 2: kind of made up the doctrine of the Trinity on

22
00:00:57,520 --> 00:00:59,520
Speaker 2: my own from the Bible when I was sixteen.

23
00:01:00,200 --> 00:01:02,800
Speaker 1: This is crazy. I never asked you this because I

24
00:01:02,840 --> 00:01:05,080
Speaker 1: did not make up the Trinity. I learned the Trinity,

25
00:01:05,120 --> 00:01:08,600
Speaker 1: and then in reverse was like, does this make sense?

26
00:01:08,800 --> 00:01:12,360
Speaker 1: Is it rational? Is it biblical? You were studying the

27
00:01:12,360 --> 00:01:15,119
Speaker 1: Bible and are like and tell us what you mean

28
00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:16,800
Speaker 1: by the Trinity and how you got there.

29
00:01:17,319 --> 00:01:19,240
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I was kind of starting from zero. I

30
00:01:19,240 --> 00:01:21,400
Speaker 2: had a Christian upbringing, but I had sort of forgotten

31
00:01:21,440 --> 00:01:23,520
Speaker 2: it all in early teen years. And so when I

32
00:01:23,520 --> 00:01:26,200
Speaker 2: got saved, I was literally surprised at church to find

33
00:01:26,240 --> 00:01:29,279
Speaker 2: out the Gospels told the same story four times. I was, okay,

34
00:01:29,319 --> 00:01:31,160
Speaker 2: so let me get this straight. There's an Old Testament,

35
00:01:31,200 --> 00:01:33,319
Speaker 2: a New Testament, and then there's like four times you

36
00:01:33,319 --> 00:01:36,160
Speaker 2: get the story of Jesus. So it's really beginner's level.

37
00:01:36,440 --> 00:01:38,800
Speaker 2: But there was a snowstorm. This was in Kentucky, and

38
00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:41,399
Speaker 2: I just spent a lot of time reading and trying

39
00:01:41,400 --> 00:01:43,520
Speaker 2: to understand on my own what was going on. It

40
00:01:43,560 --> 00:01:45,640
Speaker 2: was Ephesians one is where I kind of turned to

41
00:01:45,680 --> 00:01:47,960
Speaker 2: the corner. I was put together a lot of different

42
00:01:47,960 --> 00:01:50,320
Speaker 2: pieces about the Father saving us, and the Sun dying

43
00:01:50,360 --> 00:01:51,920
Speaker 2: for us and the Spirit living within us and all

44
00:01:51,960 --> 00:01:54,040
Speaker 2: this was God's work somehow, And I just look at

45
00:01:54,040 --> 00:01:56,960
Speaker 2: the Ephesians one three through fourteen. You know, blessed be God,

46
00:01:56,960 --> 00:01:59,400
Speaker 2: who's blessed us with every spiritual blessing, just as He

47
00:01:59,480 --> 00:02:02,200
Speaker 2: chose us Christ. We're redeemed through His blood, We're sealed

48
00:02:02,240 --> 00:02:04,400
Speaker 2: by the spirit. I was thinking, they're all this thinking

49
00:02:04,720 --> 00:02:07,120
Speaker 2: this only works if one, the one God that we're

50
00:02:07,120 --> 00:02:10,079
Speaker 2: talking about is somehow. He's the Father and the Son

51
00:02:10,160 --> 00:02:10,960
Speaker 2: and the Spirit.

52
00:02:11,160 --> 00:02:14,120
Speaker 1: So that is unbelievable to me.

53
00:02:15,120 --> 00:02:16,760
Speaker 2: Yeah, when people say, you know, the Trinity is not

54
00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:18,600
Speaker 2: really on the Bible, right, I try to be polite

55
00:02:18,639 --> 00:02:20,600
Speaker 2: and meet them where they are and be reasonable and

56
00:02:20,639 --> 00:02:23,600
Speaker 2: listen to what they mean by that. But deep down,

57
00:02:23,600 --> 00:02:25,160
Speaker 2: somewhere in the back of my mind, I think, yeah,

58
00:02:25,160 --> 00:02:26,640
Speaker 2: it's got to be there, because I didn't know nothing

59
00:02:26,680 --> 00:02:28,560
Speaker 2: when I was sixteen, and I just saw it there.

60
00:02:28,840 --> 00:02:31,880
Speaker 1: That's amazing. Okay, So, friends, we're here with doctor Fred Sanders,

61
00:02:32,280 --> 00:02:36,000
Speaker 1: who's a professor at Biola University, and gosh, you and

62
00:02:36,040 --> 00:02:38,440
Speaker 1: i've been I do know, twenty some years when you

63
00:02:38,520 --> 00:02:42,200
Speaker 1: first came here. Going way back now, I've had two

64
00:02:42,320 --> 00:02:45,840
Speaker 1: videos droppers sand the Trinity with Thomas Samuel, a former

65
00:02:46,120 --> 00:02:50,600
Speaker 1: Muslim who thought it was ridiculous, crazy polytheistic came Christian.

66
00:02:50,639 --> 00:02:53,080
Speaker 1: He's a defender of it. And then William Lane Craig

67
00:02:53,400 --> 00:02:56,600
Speaker 1: arguably want to lead an apologist and Christian philosophers today

68
00:02:56,919 --> 00:02:59,799
Speaker 1: laying out his model. Now we're going to get into

69
00:02:59,840 --> 00:03:02,840
Speaker 1: some questions. We have people submit at least a dozen questions.

70
00:03:02,880 --> 00:03:05,200
Speaker 1: I already see some live here that are great, and

71
00:03:05,200 --> 00:03:07,880
Speaker 1: we're going to take some spontaneous ones. But I think

72
00:03:07,880 --> 00:03:09,840
Speaker 1: it might be helpful if you explain just a little bit.

73
00:03:09,880 --> 00:03:13,120
Speaker 1: Where do you agree and maybe disagree in your approach

74
00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:15,120
Speaker 1: to the Trinity from doctor Craig.

75
00:03:15,760 --> 00:03:19,280
Speaker 2: Oh, from doctor Craig. Yeah, so I think we both

76
00:03:19,320 --> 00:03:22,680
Speaker 2: agree that. What I really like about doctor CRA's approach

77
00:03:22,720 --> 00:03:25,640
Speaker 2: is he emphasizes Christian that a Christian doctrine of the

78
00:03:25,680 --> 00:03:28,919
Speaker 2: Trinity is a form of monotheism. So I think the

79
00:03:29,000 --> 00:03:31,080
Speaker 2: label he currently affixes to it in his new book

80
00:03:31,400 --> 00:03:36,320
Speaker 2: Volume two B is try personal monotheism. That's right, Yeah,

81
00:03:36,320 --> 00:03:38,800
Speaker 2: that's nice. So he's solid on that, and he's got

82
00:03:38,840 --> 00:03:42,320
Speaker 2: a great traditional apologetic argument from Scripture about the deity

83
00:03:42,360 --> 00:03:44,880
Speaker 2: of the son the deity of the spirit. So a

84
00:03:44,880 --> 00:03:46,920
Speaker 2: lot in common. You know, we're both on team Trinity.

85
00:03:47,280 --> 00:03:50,680
Speaker 2: Where we really diverge is I affirm with the great

86
00:03:50,720 --> 00:03:53,440
Speaker 2: tradition that the Bible is best interpreted the way Nicea

87
00:03:53,520 --> 00:03:56,680
Speaker 2: interpreted it, that the one God who eternally exists in

88
00:03:56,720 --> 00:04:00,520
Speaker 2: three persons eternally exists as Father, Son, and Spirit, and

89
00:04:00,560 --> 00:04:02,960
Speaker 2: that Father, Son and Spirit are related to each other

90
00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:06,400
Speaker 2: in ways that are eternal relations, and that those are

91
00:04:06,600 --> 00:04:10,440
Speaker 2: how He's revealed. So the Father sends the Son, which

92
00:04:10,800 --> 00:04:13,440
Speaker 2: reveals or enacts among us the fact that the Son

93
00:04:13,520 --> 00:04:16,479
Speaker 2: eternally is from the Father within the life of God.

94
00:04:17,160 --> 00:04:19,920
Speaker 2: So that's the doctrine of eternal generation, and it's that's

95
00:04:19,960 --> 00:04:22,080
Speaker 2: kind of the theological core of how to talk about

96
00:04:22,080 --> 00:04:25,360
Speaker 2: what I see affirmed about the Trinity.

97
00:04:25,640 --> 00:04:28,400
Speaker 1: That's really helpful. We'll get into unpacking some of that.

98
00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:31,240
Speaker 1: But if you have a question for doctor Sanders, right,

99
00:04:31,400 --> 00:04:35,200
Speaker 1: question in caps and then state it here and we

100
00:04:35,240 --> 00:04:37,160
Speaker 1: will do our best to take it. So here's the

101
00:04:37,200 --> 00:04:39,520
Speaker 1: first question. This is pretty sophisticated. We're going to do

102
00:04:39,520 --> 00:04:42,000
Speaker 1: a live one here. This is I won't even read

103
00:04:42,040 --> 00:04:44,280
Speaker 1: the name, but something related I won't even read it.

104
00:04:44,360 --> 00:04:46,320
Speaker 1: Never mind. It says, what do you think about the

105
00:04:46,360 --> 00:04:50,880
Speaker 1: eternal subordination of the Son, should we caution against it

106
00:04:51,080 --> 00:04:54,280
Speaker 1: or accept it as a view that we can disagree on. Now,

107
00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:58,120
Speaker 1: maybe explain what's meant by eternal subordination of the son

108
00:04:58,520 --> 00:05:01,520
Speaker 1: for if people aren't familiar that, and then give us

109
00:05:01,560 --> 00:05:02,640
Speaker 1: your take on it.

110
00:05:02,960 --> 00:05:07,120
Speaker 2: Yeah, So the proposal, I don't want to call it

111
00:05:07,120 --> 00:05:08,920
Speaker 2: a doctrine, I guess because I think it's it's false.

112
00:05:08,960 --> 00:05:11,600
Speaker 2: So I try to say the doctrine for a good doctrine,

113
00:05:12,120 --> 00:05:15,680
Speaker 2: it's the teaching that since the incarnate son Jesus Christ

114
00:05:15,720 --> 00:05:20,200
Speaker 2: obeys the Father, he must have eternally obeyed the Father

115
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:23,280
Speaker 2: within the life of the Trinity. That even the actual

116
00:05:23,320 --> 00:05:25,960
Speaker 2: distinction and relation between Father and the Son must be

117
00:05:26,040 --> 00:05:29,919
Speaker 2: that the Father commands and the son obeys. And so

118
00:05:29,960 --> 00:05:31,760
Speaker 2: that's not something that is just a condition of the

119
00:05:31,880 --> 00:05:34,720
Speaker 2: being incarnate. That is the eternal life of the son.

120
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:37,200
Speaker 2: And for some of the people who've taught this, it's

121
00:05:37,240 --> 00:05:39,680
Speaker 2: what really distinguishes them. Like if you ask, what's the

122
00:05:39,680 --> 00:05:41,640
Speaker 2: difference between the Father and the Son? They're both God,

123
00:05:41,800 --> 00:05:44,800
Speaker 2: so what's the difference? What's the distinction? Some of the

124
00:05:44,800 --> 00:05:46,680
Speaker 2: e f S or sometimes they call it e r

125
00:05:46,760 --> 00:05:50,080
Speaker 2: a S, which stands for eternal relations of authority and submission,

126
00:05:50,680 --> 00:05:54,440
Speaker 2: not the Taylor Swift tour, but the yeah thank you, Yeah,

127
00:05:54,680 --> 00:05:58,360
Speaker 2: just clarify. Yeah, So that would be the actual distinction,

128
00:05:58,520 --> 00:06:01,280
Speaker 2: is a relationship in which the other command and the

129
00:06:01,279 --> 00:06:04,320
Speaker 2: Son obeys, within the life of God from all eternity

130
00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:06,400
Speaker 2: and to them, they would say, that's why the Father

131
00:06:06,480 --> 00:06:08,800
Speaker 2: sent the Sun, because he's commanding him back at home

132
00:06:08,839 --> 00:06:10,559
Speaker 2: in heaven, so he commands him to go to Earth.

133
00:06:10,640 --> 00:06:14,919
Speaker 1: Okay, so eternal obviously, no beginning, no end. This, you

134
00:06:15,000 --> 00:06:18,880
Speaker 1: might say, is built into God's character that the Father

135
00:06:19,000 --> 00:06:23,800
Speaker 1: commands and the Son obeys. This is who God is

136
00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:27,440
Speaker 1: and what God is. Even if God chose never to

137
00:06:27,520 --> 00:06:32,200
Speaker 1: have an incarnation and reveal himself to us, that eternal

138
00:06:32,320 --> 00:06:37,560
Speaker 1: subordination would be built into God's character, independentive creation and incarnation.

139
00:06:37,800 --> 00:06:40,760
Speaker 2: That's the EFS teaching. Now use the word functional because

140
00:06:40,760 --> 00:06:42,919
Speaker 2: they want to clarify that to their minds, that is

141
00:06:43,000 --> 00:06:46,360
Speaker 2: not subordination. They don't think that the Son is less than.

142
00:06:46,800 --> 00:06:48,599
Speaker 2: So these are people who would they affirm the trinity.

143
00:06:48,600 --> 00:06:52,640
Speaker 2: They would say, the Son is eternally coequal, co essential

144
00:06:53,440 --> 00:06:59,880
Speaker 2: and consubstantial, co essential, coeternal, and co equal. But okay obeys.

145
00:07:00,760 --> 00:07:04,440
Speaker 1: So your criticism of this it seems like somebody could say,

146
00:07:04,480 --> 00:07:08,159
Speaker 1: give me the biblical support for it. One. But then second,

147
00:07:08,279 --> 00:07:10,880
Speaker 1: and this is some of Craig's concern in his model

148
00:07:10,920 --> 00:07:15,720
Speaker 1: with examples of subordinationism, is that is there really the

149
00:07:15,840 --> 00:07:20,080
Speaker 1: equality that we have in a being God who is

150
00:07:20,240 --> 00:07:24,840
Speaker 1: three divine persons? Can there be that kind of subordination

151
00:07:25,400 --> 00:07:28,480
Speaker 1: built into God's character and still have that level of

152
00:07:28,520 --> 00:07:31,960
Speaker 1: ontological similarity your commonality?

153
00:07:32,200 --> 00:07:34,160
Speaker 2: Right? And that's the problem. So critics of e f

154
00:07:34,240 --> 00:07:37,640
Speaker 2: S and e f S doctrine is it's unorthodox, like

155
00:07:37,640 --> 00:07:40,720
Speaker 2: it's a form of trinitarianism, but trinitarianism, but it's a

156
00:07:40,760 --> 00:07:44,960
Speaker 2: defective form according to critics like Kerosy. Yeah, yeah, it's terrisy.

157
00:07:45,080 --> 00:07:47,000
Speaker 2: I mean, there was never a counsel about it or anything.

158
00:07:47,040 --> 00:07:51,440
Speaker 2: But and the people who affirm it affirm three persons

159
00:07:51,840 --> 00:07:54,320
Speaker 2: equal persons in the one God. And so I want

160
00:07:54,320 --> 00:07:56,280
Speaker 2: to use the word heresy for people who actually deny

161
00:07:56,320 --> 00:07:59,840
Speaker 2: the trinity. When someone teaches the trinity very badly with

162
00:07:59,880 --> 00:08:01,720
Speaker 2: the serious flaw in it that we need to warn

163
00:08:01,760 --> 00:08:04,120
Speaker 2: people about. I still think that's wrong, but not every

164
00:08:04,120 --> 00:08:05,480
Speaker 2: wrong idea is a heresy.

165
00:08:05,840 --> 00:08:08,120
Speaker 1: Okay. So before we come back to questions, one more

166
00:08:08,160 --> 00:08:12,440
Speaker 1: for clarification, denying the trinity? Would this be? There's kind

167
00:08:12,440 --> 00:08:16,960
Speaker 1: of the dance between the social trinitarianism and what Bill

168
00:08:17,080 --> 00:08:20,720
Speaker 1: Craig calls the anti social trinitarianism, and these we all

169
00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:25,000
Speaker 1: have different languages for these things. One wants to maintain

170
00:08:25,160 --> 00:08:29,600
Speaker 1: the threeness, the other side wants to maintain the oneness.

171
00:08:30,120 --> 00:08:33,840
Speaker 1: And there's different models to say God is one and

172
00:08:33,920 --> 00:08:38,079
Speaker 1: God is three? Is it heresy when you deny the

173
00:08:38,120 --> 00:08:42,160
Speaker 1: threeness or the oneness? Is that the line that makes

174
00:08:42,200 --> 00:08:44,280
Speaker 1: it heresy when it comes to the trinity, or at

175
00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:46,000
Speaker 1: least one of the lines.

176
00:08:47,280 --> 00:08:49,880
Speaker 2: Yeah, it would be heresy to deny a threeness or oneness.

177
00:08:49,920 --> 00:08:52,600
Speaker 2: You wouldn't be affirming the Christian doctrine of the trinity.

178
00:08:52,679 --> 00:08:56,200
Speaker 2: So on these different philosophical models that people get committed to.

179
00:08:56,840 --> 00:08:59,800
Speaker 2: Both of them are trying to affirm threeness and oneness.

180
00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:02,200
Speaker 2: Right now, both of them accuse the other of blowing

181
00:09:02,200 --> 00:09:03,959
Speaker 2: it one way or the other. But that's kind of

182
00:09:03,960 --> 00:09:06,880
Speaker 2: like one of those Calvinism in our Minianism fights. Right. Sure,

183
00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:10,320
Speaker 2: both have to affirm human responsibility and divine sovereignty, and

184
00:09:10,400 --> 00:09:13,080
Speaker 2: both think the other side cheats, but.

185
00:09:13,320 --> 00:09:16,480
Speaker 1: So oneness has to be onto logical though not just

186
00:09:16,520 --> 00:09:20,480
Speaker 1: oneness and purpose. Oh yeah, like we had three beings

187
00:09:20,480 --> 00:09:23,079
Speaker 1: and it is a Latter day Saint view that there's

188
00:09:23,200 --> 00:09:28,880
Speaker 1: three gods try persons, and they're one in terms of purpose,

189
00:09:29,000 --> 00:09:33,520
Speaker 1: but not one substantially. You'd say that's an example something

190
00:09:33,600 --> 00:09:37,240
Speaker 1: that's outside of the Christian orthodox lane of understanding who

191
00:09:37,280 --> 00:09:40,600
Speaker 1: God is. That's one example of you call that heresy.

192
00:09:40,800 --> 00:09:42,920
Speaker 2: Yes, that's fair. Yeah, so there are lots of things

193
00:09:42,960 --> 00:09:45,120
Speaker 2: that go by the name social trinity. If you're talking

194
00:09:45,120 --> 00:09:49,120
Speaker 2: about like a radical social trinitarianism, where the only unity

195
00:09:49,160 --> 00:09:51,400
Speaker 2: that those three have is they're the same kind of thing.

196
00:09:51,520 --> 00:09:54,080
Speaker 2: And do they agree about stuff? That's a committee, you know,

197
00:09:54,160 --> 00:09:56,760
Speaker 2: that's not that's not the kind of oneness we need.

198
00:09:56,960 --> 00:09:58,559
Speaker 2: I've a non committees. They're not divine.

199
00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:04,520
Speaker 1: Okay, committees and octivine I love it. Okay, helpful. Let's

200
00:10:04,640 --> 00:10:08,720
Speaker 1: let's go to some more questions here. Okay, some people

201
00:10:08,760 --> 00:10:14,200
Speaker 1: are seriously savvy theologically. Here fred he says, does the

202
00:10:14,240 --> 00:10:17,960
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit proceed from the Father and the Son or

203
00:10:18,000 --> 00:10:21,920
Speaker 1: the Father? Only? Now before people clickling, go why are

204
00:10:21,960 --> 00:10:25,240
Speaker 1: we even talking about this? This is a huge issue

205
00:10:25,400 --> 00:10:29,840
Speaker 1: historically speaking, So why does this issue matter, and what's

206
00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:31,840
Speaker 1: kind of at stake with how we answer this and

207
00:10:31,880 --> 00:10:32,760
Speaker 1: what's your take on it?

208
00:10:32,920 --> 00:10:35,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, so this is one of the hardest issues to

209
00:10:35,640 --> 00:10:38,640
Speaker 2: say anything helpful about, you know, sort of a public

210
00:10:38,679 --> 00:10:41,680
Speaker 2: setting where there's a range of levels of knowledge, because

211
00:10:41,679 --> 00:10:44,000
Speaker 2: some people are just now hearing that people actually argue

212
00:10:44,000 --> 00:10:46,720
Speaker 2: about this. Other people are deeply committed to it and

213
00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:49,760
Speaker 2: lead with the short question what about the philioquay? So

214
00:10:49,800 --> 00:10:51,439
Speaker 2: to answer it, you gotta go, well, our story starts

215
00:10:51,480 --> 00:10:54,560
Speaker 2: in three twenty five and I always feel like Denzel Washington, like,

216
00:10:54,600 --> 00:10:56,640
Speaker 2: you know, setting a clock, like Okay, let me equalize

217
00:10:56,679 --> 00:11:00,520
Speaker 2: this right. So, yeah, there is a there is a

218
00:11:00,760 --> 00:11:04,480
Speaker 2: disagreement among two major branches of the Christian Church over

219
00:11:04,520 --> 00:11:08,160
Speaker 2: whether we should talk about the Holy Spirit as proceeding

220
00:11:08,200 --> 00:11:11,840
Speaker 2: from the Father or proceeding from the Father and from

221
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:14,959
Speaker 2: the Son. Now, just to clarify, we're not talking about

222
00:11:15,000 --> 00:11:18,200
Speaker 2: how the Holy Spirit is sent into Salvation history. Actually,

223
00:11:18,240 --> 00:11:20,760
Speaker 2: everyone who is a competent Bible reader agrees that the

224
00:11:20,800 --> 00:11:24,000
Speaker 2: Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit into Salvation

225
00:11:24,160 --> 00:11:26,679
Speaker 2: History says it like five times in the Gospel of John.

226
00:11:26,840 --> 00:11:28,640
Speaker 2: I will ask the Father and he will send the Spirit,

227
00:11:28,880 --> 00:11:30,800
Speaker 2: the Holy Spirit, who I will send from the Father.

228
00:11:31,280 --> 00:11:34,080
Speaker 2: We all agree about that, unless you're highlighting verses in

229
00:11:34,120 --> 00:11:36,640
Speaker 2: black and the Bible, you know, it's just right there.

230
00:11:37,200 --> 00:11:40,040
Speaker 2: The question is that sending into salvation history is that

231
00:11:40,080 --> 00:11:43,240
Speaker 2: based on an eternal life in which the spirit is

232
00:11:43,360 --> 00:11:46,559
Speaker 2: always sort of breathed out from the Father and only

233
00:11:46,600 --> 00:11:48,840
Speaker 2: from the Father. So on that view, it's like the

234
00:11:48,840 --> 00:11:51,200
Speaker 2: son is begotten of the Father. That's why he's the son.

235
00:11:51,559 --> 00:11:53,440
Speaker 2: The spirit is not begotten, or he'd be like the

236
00:11:53,520 --> 00:11:56,080
Speaker 2: brother or the grandson or the other brother or something

237
00:11:56,120 --> 00:11:58,120
Speaker 2: like the other son or something like that. The spirit's

238
00:11:58,160 --> 00:12:01,640
Speaker 2: breathed out by the Father. The East wants to say, period,

239
00:12:01,840 --> 00:12:05,120
Speaker 2: that's it, And the Nicene Creed from three eighty one

240
00:12:05,400 --> 00:12:08,400
Speaker 2: says only that I believe in the Holy Spirit, the

241
00:12:08,440 --> 00:12:10,440
Speaker 2: Lord and giver of life, who, together with the Father

242
00:12:10,480 --> 00:12:13,880
Speaker 2: and Son, is worshiped and glorified, who proceeds from the Father.

243
00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:17,760
Speaker 2: At some point in the long history of the world,

244
00:12:18,160 --> 00:12:21,120
Speaker 2: the West began reciting the Nicene Creed of three eighty

245
00:12:21,160 --> 00:12:23,640
Speaker 2: one with the additional claim, I believe in the Holy Spirit,

246
00:12:23,679 --> 00:12:27,319
Speaker 2: who proceeds from the Father and from the Son philio

247
00:12:27,520 --> 00:12:30,960
Speaker 2: quay and from the Son. Oh okay, Yeah, the quay

248
00:12:30,960 --> 00:12:33,240
Speaker 2: is a little and it just comes after the word phileas.

249
00:12:34,520 --> 00:12:38,080
Speaker 1: Okay, we'll let that one sit. Yeah, right now, there's

250
00:12:38,120 --> 00:12:40,880
Speaker 1: so much more we can go down that road. Okay,

251
00:12:40,920 --> 00:12:43,240
Speaker 1: So this one is a little bit. This came from

252
00:12:43,240 --> 00:12:46,040
Speaker 1: a skeptic. I don't often take questions frame like this,

253
00:12:46,120 --> 00:12:49,400
Speaker 1: but I'm gonna throw to you and lay respond. Person says, quote,

254
00:12:49,520 --> 00:12:54,720
Speaker 1: all utrinitarians are deceived liars. Show me one scripture that

255
00:12:54,920 --> 00:12:58,600
Speaker 1: says God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Those

256
00:12:58,640 --> 00:13:02,160
Speaker 1: words aren't in the Bible. Only God the Father is

257
00:13:02,200 --> 00:13:02,800
Speaker 1: in the Bible.

258
00:13:04,640 --> 00:13:06,400
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, it's hard to address because it's a little

259
00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:09,080
Speaker 2: bit of a puppet show, right. It's the imaginary person

260
00:13:09,200 --> 00:13:11,280
Speaker 2: that he wants to argue with as someone who dogmatically

261
00:13:11,280 --> 00:13:13,040
Speaker 2: asserts that the phrase God the Son is in the

262
00:13:13,040 --> 00:13:17,080
Speaker 2: Bible or he's got that impression from somebody. God the

263
00:13:17,160 --> 00:13:20,720
Speaker 2: Son is a helpful traditional way of describing the doctrine

264
00:13:20,760 --> 00:13:22,520
Speaker 2: of the deity of Christ. So we say he's the

265
00:13:22,520 --> 00:13:25,079
Speaker 2: Son of God. That's the biblical language. But we also say,

266
00:13:25,280 --> 00:13:28,679
Speaker 2: when we're naming who this person is, we collect his

267
00:13:29,080 --> 00:13:32,559
Speaker 2: essential identity as God, having the one who has the

268
00:13:32,600 --> 00:13:36,000
Speaker 2: divine nature, and then we specify his personal identity as

269
00:13:36,040 --> 00:13:39,360
Speaker 2: the Son. So it's a really handy phrase, but it's

270
00:13:39,400 --> 00:13:43,199
Speaker 2: a phrase from theological tradition, which is a helpful commentary

271
00:13:43,520 --> 00:13:44,520
Speaker 2: on what the Bible says.

272
00:13:45,120 --> 00:13:48,719
Speaker 1: Okay, so the language God the Father that's biblical is

273
00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:52,800
Speaker 1: that is biblical language. So the assumption seems to be

274
00:13:53,280 --> 00:13:56,320
Speaker 1: is if Jesus was also equally divine and the Holy

275
00:13:56,400 --> 00:14:00,000
Speaker 1: Spirit was also equally divine, we'd see the same language,

276
00:14:00,040 --> 00:14:02,280
Speaker 1: which as we see for the Father, God the Father,

277
00:14:02,360 --> 00:14:04,640
Speaker 1: we'd see God the Son. We'd see God the Holy Spirit.

278
00:14:05,040 --> 00:14:08,480
Speaker 1: We don't see the same language. Therefore they're not God

279
00:14:08,600 --> 00:14:12,640
Speaker 1: in the same way. The assumption is that the doctrine

280
00:14:12,720 --> 00:14:17,880
Speaker 1: flows from similar language. Well, one question would be is

281
00:14:18,040 --> 00:14:22,520
Speaker 1: that necessarily true? And I would say no. In fact,

282
00:14:22,640 --> 00:14:26,480
Speaker 1: sometimes I think, like in the Greek Churios, referring Lord

283
00:14:26,520 --> 00:14:30,480
Speaker 1: to Jesus is a way of distinguishing him from the

284
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:34,840
Speaker 1: Father equally divine but a different term to show that

285
00:14:34,880 --> 00:14:38,600
Speaker 1: they're not the same person and avoid the mistake of modalism.

286
00:14:38,600 --> 00:14:40,960
Speaker 1: Even though the term wasn't used at that point, it

287
00:14:40,960 --> 00:14:44,760
Speaker 1: would still avoid that heresy. So the question is not

288
00:14:44,880 --> 00:14:47,760
Speaker 1: are the words God the Father used. But does the

289
00:14:47,760 --> 00:14:52,000
Speaker 1: Bible teach that the Father is divine, the Son is divine,

290
00:14:52,040 --> 00:14:54,640
Speaker 1: and the Spirit is divine. And we don't have to

291
00:14:54,640 --> 00:14:56,520
Speaker 1: give a whole lecture here, But of course I would

292
00:14:56,520 --> 00:14:59,000
Speaker 1: go straight some of my favorite pastors be obviously in

293
00:14:59,120 --> 00:15:04,280
Speaker 1: John John one one, John one, eighteen, John eight, fifty eight,

294
00:15:04,400 --> 00:15:06,960
Speaker 1: ten thirty, and thirty one, twenty twenty eight. I mean,

295
00:15:07,200 --> 00:15:12,360
Speaker 1: so I think crystal clear that Jesus is God equal

296
00:15:12,440 --> 00:15:15,160
Speaker 1: to the Father, even though he's subordinate in his role.

297
00:15:15,280 --> 00:15:19,200
Speaker 1: I don't want to take us aside Titus two thirteen,

298
00:15:19,520 --> 00:15:24,240
Speaker 1: where reverse our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, and

299
00:15:24,280 --> 00:15:28,480
Speaker 1: it's both. That's how theos used for Jesus, which is

300
00:15:28,600 --> 00:15:31,480
Speaker 1: usually used of the Father. Right, of course, to the

301
00:15:31,480 --> 00:15:33,640
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit, we can point towards Acts five. You didn't

302
00:15:33,680 --> 00:15:36,040
Speaker 1: lie to then you lied towards the Holy You lie

303
00:15:36,080 --> 00:15:37,680
Speaker 1: towards God, who's the Holy Spirit.

304
00:15:37,880 --> 00:15:40,000
Speaker 2: Yeah, Isaiah sixty three, I was in your midst. I

305
00:15:40,000 --> 00:15:42,880
Speaker 2: put my spirit in your midst, but you grieved my spirit,

306
00:15:42,960 --> 00:15:45,000
Speaker 2: and then I if he's in four to thirty quotes

307
00:15:45,040 --> 00:15:47,040
Speaker 2: it as do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God.

308
00:15:47,080 --> 00:15:49,560
Speaker 2: So the deity and the distinct personhood of the spirit,

309
00:15:49,960 --> 00:15:50,520
Speaker 2: good stuff.

310
00:15:50,560 --> 00:15:52,920
Speaker 1: So I, you know, sometimes I don't pick people that

311
00:15:53,040 --> 00:15:57,080
Speaker 1: attack like this Bona says you're deceived liars. There's one

312
00:15:57,080 --> 00:15:59,600
Speaker 1: thing to say that somebody's wrong. It's another thing to say,

313
00:15:59,600 --> 00:16:02,520
Speaker 1: is somebody directly a liar? So I try to not

314
00:16:02,640 --> 00:16:06,080
Speaker 1: attribute to people who differ from me as being liars,

315
00:16:06,160 --> 00:16:08,880
Speaker 1: even if I think they are deceived.

316
00:16:09,560 --> 00:16:11,720
Speaker 2: I could do a sympathetic read of that hostile question.

317
00:16:12,800 --> 00:16:15,080
Speaker 2: If you're told all your life that Christians believe in

318
00:16:15,160 --> 00:16:18,400
Speaker 2: the trinity, which means there are three persons in one essence,

319
00:16:19,320 --> 00:16:22,480
Speaker 2: almost none of those words are in the Bible trinity

320
00:16:22,680 --> 00:16:27,200
Speaker 2: person three essence like those are all commentary that you

321
00:16:27,240 --> 00:16:29,520
Speaker 2: re read the Bible and say, here's what I think

322
00:16:29,520 --> 00:16:32,360
Speaker 2: this means. Because if we just memorize the words and

323
00:16:32,400 --> 00:16:34,160
Speaker 2: bark them back and forth at each other, we could

324
00:16:34,160 --> 00:16:36,400
Speaker 2: disagree about them but not know it unless we pony

325
00:16:36,480 --> 00:16:39,040
Speaker 2: up an actual specification of what we mean by what

326
00:16:39,080 --> 00:16:42,400
Speaker 2: we're reading. So you can understand the disappointment. If you're taught, Okay,

327
00:16:42,440 --> 00:16:43,880
Speaker 2: if you read the Bible, what you're going to see

328
00:16:43,920 --> 00:16:46,080
Speaker 2: is the trinity, three persons in one being. Then you

329
00:16:46,120 --> 00:16:49,000
Speaker 2: read it and none of those words occur here as oh,

330
00:16:49,320 --> 00:16:53,160
Speaker 2: you really gave me the boiled down summary commentary version.

331
00:16:53,760 --> 00:16:56,480
Speaker 2: I Actually sometimes I'll say, the word trinity is a

332
00:16:56,480 --> 00:17:00,680
Speaker 2: brilliant commentary on scripture, and so wants to fight about

333
00:17:00,680 --> 00:17:02,640
Speaker 2: the Trinity. I'll come fight about the Trinity, but I

334
00:17:02,680 --> 00:17:06,080
Speaker 2: want to fight about the text, not the commentary. And

335
00:17:06,119 --> 00:17:08,399
Speaker 2: so that's what you just did by constructing the doctrine

336
00:17:08,400 --> 00:17:10,800
Speaker 2: of the deity of the Sun from a range of evidence.

337
00:17:11,000 --> 00:17:12,600
Speaker 2: That all has to be handled the way it's really

338
00:17:12,600 --> 00:17:15,200
Speaker 2: sitting there in scripture, right. I think it's so important

339
00:17:15,359 --> 00:17:19,640
Speaker 2: to acknowledge that the New Testament usually reserves the word

340
00:17:19,680 --> 00:17:22,520
Speaker 2: God for the first person of the Trinity, God, Theos

341
00:17:22,520 --> 00:17:25,520
Speaker 2: so loved the world that he sent his son. Now,

342
00:17:25,600 --> 00:17:27,600
Speaker 2: it's also worth going on to say, by the way,

343
00:17:27,640 --> 00:17:30,480
Speaker 2: there's six or twelve or fourteen passages where theos is

344
00:17:30,520 --> 00:17:32,639
Speaker 2: applied to Jesus, and there's a great book on that by.

345
00:17:32,520 --> 00:17:36,680
Speaker 1: Murray Harris Omans nine five, t two thirteen, John one one,

346
00:17:36,680 --> 00:17:37,720
Speaker 1: and John one eighteen.

347
00:17:37,880 --> 00:17:39,720
Speaker 2: But I don't want to make it look like my

348
00:17:39,920 --> 00:17:45,040
Speaker 2: case stands or falls applied to because it's the use

349
00:17:45,040 --> 00:17:48,719
Speaker 2: of the word lord to apply to Jesus or his names,

350
00:17:48,800 --> 00:17:52,439
Speaker 2: his actions, you know, his attributes, the fact that he's

351
00:17:52,440 --> 00:17:54,800
Speaker 2: seated at the right hand, all those things go to

352
00:17:54,840 --> 00:17:56,760
Speaker 2: the case for the deity of Christ.

353
00:17:56,920 --> 00:17:58,600
Speaker 1: So what would you say, I see, I see a

354
00:17:58,640 --> 00:18:01,879
Speaker 1: questioning about how who we should pray to. I'm going

355
00:18:01,920 --> 00:18:04,760
Speaker 1: to come back to that one in a minute, But

356
00:18:05,200 --> 00:18:07,960
Speaker 1: I'm curious, how would you respond to the claim that

357
00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:11,720
Speaker 1: the trinity was invented kind of in I don't know

358
00:18:11,720 --> 00:18:14,360
Speaker 1: whether it's at Nicea or in the fourth century, when

359
00:18:14,400 --> 00:18:17,000
Speaker 1: we had this Greek thinking we're reading back into and

360
00:18:17,080 --> 00:18:20,760
Speaker 1: inventing this doctrine that's not there. How would you respond

361
00:18:20,840 --> 00:18:21,920
Speaker 1: to that common objection?

362
00:18:24,480 --> 00:18:26,800
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I guess you could build on the fact

363
00:18:26,800 --> 00:18:30,120
Speaker 2: that I just mentioned all this helpful theological terminology that's

364
00:18:30,160 --> 00:18:33,159
Speaker 2: sort of theological commentary on what they're in Scripture. So

365
00:18:33,240 --> 00:18:36,159
Speaker 2: trinity essence, if you want to flag all those words

366
00:18:36,160 --> 00:18:40,760
Speaker 2: as Greek or somehow infected by or carrying Greek metaphysical

367
00:18:40,800 --> 00:18:43,760
Speaker 2: presuppositions or something, then I could see why someone would

368
00:18:43,800 --> 00:18:49,080
Speaker 2: say that. But the Greek speaking and Latin speaking church

369
00:18:49,119 --> 00:18:51,919
Speaker 2: fathers who wrote these books and had these discussions and

370
00:18:51,960 --> 00:18:55,119
Speaker 2: had these arguments, were constantly appealing to scripture, and they

371
00:18:55,119 --> 00:18:58,320
Speaker 2: were not saying, let us invent a doctrine. They were saying,

372
00:18:58,640 --> 00:19:00,879
Speaker 2: this is what we believe the by teaches. They were

373
00:19:00,920 --> 00:19:04,520
Speaker 2: always presenting it as the teaching of scripture.

374
00:19:05,680 --> 00:19:08,080
Speaker 1: So would you would you say it's a movement towards

375
00:19:08,320 --> 00:19:11,840
Speaker 1: clarity using language that itself is not in the Bible,

376
00:19:12,359 --> 00:19:16,560
Speaker 1: but language to articulate what the Bible itself teaches.

377
00:19:16,880 --> 00:19:17,160
Speaker 2: Yes?

378
00:19:17,280 --> 00:19:17,760
Speaker 1: Is that fair?

379
00:19:17,920 --> 00:19:20,520
Speaker 2: Yeah? And the greatest breakthroughs tended to be sort of

380
00:19:20,520 --> 00:19:24,320
Speaker 2: providentially when serious heresies arose, because you can say lots

381
00:19:24,320 --> 00:19:26,119
Speaker 2: of things in a high trust environment when you all

382
00:19:26,200 --> 00:19:30,040
Speaker 2: kind of believe the right stuff. You know, we often

383
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:33,280
Speaker 2: say bad sentences about our good theology and we cut

384
00:19:33,280 --> 00:19:34,840
Speaker 2: each other some slack on it, like, yeah, that didn't

385
00:19:34,920 --> 00:19:36,359
Speaker 2: quite come out right, But I think I know what

386
00:19:36,400 --> 00:19:39,040
Speaker 2: you mean by that. But then someone says, you know,

387
00:19:39,080 --> 00:19:41,320
Speaker 2: I think the son is less than the Father. You mean,

388
00:19:41,359 --> 00:19:43,600
Speaker 2: like the incarnate son. No, I mean I think the

389
00:19:43,640 --> 00:19:47,159
Speaker 2: son before the incarnation is a creature that the Father made. Like, okay,

390
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:50,240
Speaker 2: that's if you seriously mean what you just said. We

391
00:19:50,359 --> 00:19:53,680
Speaker 2: now have to invent some ways of describing why you're

392
00:19:53,720 --> 00:19:56,879
Speaker 2: wrong that are more elaborate and more explicit than the

393
00:19:56,880 --> 00:19:57,800
Speaker 2: way the Bible's talking.

394
00:19:59,200 --> 00:20:01,560
Speaker 1: Here's a question. It says, we know, the Bible says

395
00:20:01,600 --> 00:20:04,719
Speaker 1: they are equal in purpose, referring to Father, Son, and

396
00:20:04,760 --> 00:20:07,440
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit. Where in the Bible does this say they're

397
00:20:07,520 --> 00:20:12,320
Speaker 1: equal in something else, such as nature or essence. Where's

398
00:20:12,440 --> 00:20:16,639
Speaker 1: the oneness that was later the humusaas and that the

399
00:20:16,760 --> 00:20:19,840
Speaker 1: substance language they come up. We don't see that in

400
00:20:19,920 --> 00:20:22,200
Speaker 1: the Bible. So how do we come to conclusion there's

401
00:20:22,240 --> 00:20:25,400
Speaker 1: the oneness in essence in the Bible itself.

402
00:20:25,760 --> 00:20:28,760
Speaker 2: Yeah, there are a lot of ways to get at this. Again.

403
00:20:28,800 --> 00:20:30,399
Speaker 2: You could the doctrin of the Train is a very

404
00:20:30,480 --> 00:20:33,119
Speaker 2: large doctrine that includes within the doctrine of Christ and

405
00:20:33,160 --> 00:20:35,720
Speaker 2: the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Right, so we could

406
00:20:35,760 --> 00:20:37,439
Speaker 2: go to the doctrine of the Son and the doctrine

407
00:20:37,440 --> 00:20:39,520
Speaker 2: of the Spirit and talk about as soon as you

408
00:20:39,560 --> 00:20:44,240
Speaker 2: say they are God or they are divine, then you're

409
00:20:44,240 --> 00:20:48,000
Speaker 2: you're making an affirmation about what essence they have, Like

410
00:20:48,040 --> 00:20:50,840
Speaker 2: they're not They're not made of something else. You know,

411
00:20:50,880 --> 00:20:54,440
Speaker 2: they're not made at all. What they are is what

412
00:20:54,520 --> 00:20:55,399
Speaker 2: God the Father is.

413
00:20:56,240 --> 00:21:00,239
Speaker 1: And this is not so the understanding of divine kind

414
00:21:00,280 --> 00:21:04,280
Speaker 1: of language that was used. There's the divine council. There's

415
00:21:04,359 --> 00:21:07,720
Speaker 1: other spirit beings, you're saying. Once they're referred to as

416
00:21:07,800 --> 00:21:14,920
Speaker 1: divine in the way that this eternal, uncreated, self existent

417
00:21:15,400 --> 00:21:21,040
Speaker 1: Jewish understanding of who and what God is, that's what

418
00:21:21,080 --> 00:21:24,520
Speaker 1: we mean by divine. And we see examples of this,

419
00:21:24,680 --> 00:21:28,720
Speaker 1: like when Jus says, before Abraham was born, I am

420
00:21:29,480 --> 00:21:33,200
Speaker 1: referring to being the God who spoke in the flame

421
00:21:33,359 --> 00:21:36,720
Speaker 1: fire itself in Exos chapter three. It's going, whoa wait

422
00:21:36,720 --> 00:21:39,160
Speaker 1: a minute. You're not just claiming to be a God

423
00:21:39,240 --> 00:21:44,040
Speaker 1: amongst many. You're claiming to be the God that carries

424
00:21:44,119 --> 00:21:46,639
Speaker 1: with it a certain kind of nature and essence of

425
00:21:46,680 --> 00:21:49,840
Speaker 1: what it means to be God within their worldview. Even

426
00:21:49,880 --> 00:21:52,200
Speaker 1: though we don't have the words, oh, they are one

427
00:21:52,240 --> 00:21:54,879
Speaker 1: in essence, they're one in Nature's is that I'm not

428
00:21:54,920 --> 00:21:56,440
Speaker 1: trying to put words in your mouth. I'm not trying

429
00:21:56,440 --> 00:21:58,520
Speaker 1: to articulate what I hear you saying, because.

430
00:21:58,440 --> 00:22:00,680
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's right. And what I like about

431
00:22:00,680 --> 00:22:03,960
Speaker 2: that approach is underlying all of this is a comprehensive

432
00:22:04,080 --> 00:22:06,679
Speaker 2: understanding what's going on in the New Testament. In the

433
00:22:06,720 --> 00:22:10,360
Speaker 2: New Testament, God doesn't just intervene to save us from

434
00:22:10,359 --> 00:22:12,159
Speaker 2: this thing or that thing or the other thing. The

435
00:22:12,240 --> 00:22:15,320
Speaker 2: New Testament is the story of the revelation and accomplishment

436
00:22:15,480 --> 00:22:18,720
Speaker 2: of actual salvation. And the Christian notion of what the

437
00:22:18,760 --> 00:22:24,360
Speaker 2: Gospel is is that it's reconciliation. It's personal reconciliation with God.

438
00:22:25,040 --> 00:22:27,800
Speaker 2: That's not the kind of salvation that God can dispatch

439
00:22:28,000 --> 00:22:32,359
Speaker 2: an agent to carry out. Right, if salvation is what

440
00:22:32,400 --> 00:22:34,960
Speaker 2: we think it is, if it's actually reconciliation with God,

441
00:22:35,000 --> 00:22:37,919
Speaker 2: then only God can undertake the action of doing that.

442
00:22:38,240 --> 00:22:40,400
Speaker 2: And so that means if the Father sends the son,

443
00:22:40,640 --> 00:22:42,680
Speaker 2: we can't treat him as just like the next Moses

444
00:22:42,760 --> 00:22:45,199
Speaker 2: or a super angel or any kind of creature to

445
00:22:45,240 --> 00:22:50,679
Speaker 2: whom this god worthy salvation is delegated. Now that's a standback,

446
00:22:50,760 --> 00:22:53,040
Speaker 2: you know, one hundred yards from the Bible and look

447
00:22:53,080 --> 00:22:55,119
Speaker 2: at and say, I think I see the whole thing here,

448
00:22:55,200 --> 00:22:57,800
Speaker 2: like the entire picture here is this is what's at

449
00:22:57,800 --> 00:23:00,840
Speaker 2: stake in salvation. I also like a good Bible fight,

450
00:23:00,880 --> 00:23:03,080
Speaker 2: and I think that's a winnable fight. So here averse

451
00:23:03,080 --> 00:23:04,639
Speaker 2: there reverse, let me prove this part of it, let

452
00:23:04,680 --> 00:23:06,600
Speaker 2: me prove that of it. I like that way of

453
00:23:06,640 --> 00:23:09,359
Speaker 2: approaching it. But it's all based on a more holistic,

454
00:23:09,440 --> 00:23:12,199
Speaker 2: fundamental understanding of what the Gospel is.

455
00:23:12,840 --> 00:23:17,920
Speaker 1: Okay, good stuff. Here's one. I appreciate your willingness to

456
00:23:17,960 --> 00:23:21,360
Speaker 1: take these tough ones, he says. Question, is the affirmation

457
00:23:21,560 --> 00:23:27,040
Speaker 1: of metaphysical understanding of the identity of God required for salvation?

458
00:23:28,160 --> 00:23:30,600
Speaker 1: Show a text? Now, I'm not going to require that

459
00:23:30,680 --> 00:23:35,520
Speaker 1: you show a text necessarily for this, but the question is,

460
00:23:35,680 --> 00:23:38,879
Speaker 1: we have to affirm the metaphysical understanding of the identity

461
00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:43,280
Speaker 1: of God. So not only that God is triune and

462
00:23:43,359 --> 00:23:46,800
Speaker 1: that maintains the threeeness and the oneness, but we have

463
00:23:46,920 --> 00:23:51,240
Speaker 1: to affirm that to be saved. If I understand, hopefully Thomas,

464
00:23:51,240 --> 00:23:54,360
Speaker 1: I get your question correctly, So does that make sense?

465
00:23:54,359 --> 00:23:57,000
Speaker 1: Do we have to affirm that we understand the metaphysical

466
00:23:57,119 --> 00:24:00,639
Speaker 1: unity and nature and understanding threeeness to God to be saved?

467
00:24:00,640 --> 00:24:02,480
Speaker 1: And if so, can you think of a text that

468
00:24:02,520 --> 00:24:03,240
Speaker 1: would support that?

469
00:24:04,720 --> 00:24:07,720
Speaker 2: Yeah? So, so let me kind of take that question

470
00:24:07,760 --> 00:24:08,680
Speaker 2: apart just a little bit.

471
00:24:09,200 --> 00:24:10,639
Speaker 1: Do it as much as you need to.

472
00:24:11,280 --> 00:24:16,359
Speaker 2: Yeah, a metaphysical understanding of God. If I say I

473
00:24:16,359 --> 00:24:19,960
Speaker 2: believe in God, and I could be satisfied. If you

474
00:24:20,000 --> 00:24:21,720
Speaker 2: say you believe in God, I could be satisfied with that.

475
00:24:22,320 --> 00:24:25,280
Speaker 2: But then if I ask you, do you think anything exists?

476
00:24:25,320 --> 00:24:26,760
Speaker 2: Do you think there's such a thing as reality? And

477
00:24:26,800 --> 00:24:29,480
Speaker 2: you say, no, there's no reality, but I believe in God.

478
00:24:29,480 --> 00:24:32,760
Speaker 2: Well I was initially satisfied with your claim to believe

479
00:24:32,800 --> 00:24:34,520
Speaker 2: in God, but now that you don't think there's reality,

480
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,359
Speaker 2: I am no longer satisfied. Like you got yourself in

481
00:24:37,400 --> 00:24:40,119
Speaker 2: trouble by having other commitments that surfaced. You know what

482
00:24:40,359 --> 00:24:41,919
Speaker 2: seemed like an orthodox statement to begin with.

483
00:24:41,960 --> 00:24:42,360
Speaker 1: That's fair.

484
00:24:43,200 --> 00:24:46,399
Speaker 2: One reason that this metaphysical thinking gets blamed on Greeks

485
00:24:46,480 --> 00:24:50,080
Speaker 2: is the Greeks downstream from Plato, which means downstream from Socrates,

486
00:24:50,480 --> 00:24:53,800
Speaker 2: had a just a great intellectual habit of asking what

487
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:58,000
Speaker 2: is questions? Right, Oh, that person's brave? Really, what is courage? Well,

488
00:24:58,040 --> 00:24:59,440
Speaker 2: it's you know when you stand up to somebody. No,

489
00:24:59,480 --> 00:25:01,520
Speaker 2: that's an exist sample of courage. What is the what

490
00:25:01,760 --> 00:25:04,160
Speaker 2: is courage? This is Socrates? This is why he throw

491
00:25:04,160 --> 00:25:06,520
Speaker 2: everyone crazy, This is why they killed him? Right, just

492
00:25:06,600 --> 00:25:09,240
Speaker 2: keeping up of what is question? What is courage? What

493
00:25:09,359 --> 00:25:12,520
Speaker 2: actually is the isness? The courage is Well, that's saying

494
00:25:12,600 --> 00:25:15,000
Speaker 2: is a lot. But you're getting metaphysical with it, right.

495
00:25:15,040 --> 00:25:17,600
Speaker 2: At some point you're saying, there's this has got some

496
00:25:17,680 --> 00:25:21,080
Speaker 2: kind of immaterial substance to it. It's real, and so

497
00:25:21,600 --> 00:25:25,280
Speaker 2: a metaphysical understanding of God, I think is necessary in

498
00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:28,360
Speaker 2: some sense if you raise the question and get into

499
00:25:28,480 --> 00:25:31,000
Speaker 2: it right in one since Arias comes along and he's

500
00:25:31,000 --> 00:25:33,440
Speaker 2: the first guy to be really clear about the fact

501
00:25:33,720 --> 00:25:37,120
Speaker 2: that he thinks the Son is a different isness than

502
00:25:37,160 --> 00:25:39,360
Speaker 2: what the Father is, and you kind of will move

503
00:25:39,359 --> 00:25:41,200
Speaker 2: around to clarifying do you mean he's a distinct person

504
00:25:41,240 --> 00:25:43,400
Speaker 2: because we all agree with that. No, I think he's

505
00:25:43,400 --> 00:25:49,359
Speaker 2: a distinct substance. I think the metaphysical substance that makes

506
00:25:49,359 --> 00:25:52,600
Speaker 2: the Sun what he is is a different lower and

507
00:25:52,640 --> 00:25:55,639
Speaker 2: created substance than God. The Father is. Like Okay, well,

508
00:25:55,680 --> 00:25:58,679
Speaker 2: now you've been crystal clear about it. You're crystal clear wrong. Like,

509
00:25:58,760 --> 00:26:01,440
Speaker 2: now we're gonna you've made a metaphysical heretical claim. We're

510
00:26:01,440 --> 00:26:04,679
Speaker 2: going to make a metaphysical orthodox claim. But obviously there

511
00:26:04,680 --> 00:26:07,080
Speaker 2: are billions of Christians all around the world, all through

512
00:26:07,119 --> 00:26:10,679
Speaker 2: history who can't do metaphysics, and they're doing just fine.

513
00:26:11,359 --> 00:26:13,480
Speaker 1: Okay, So there has to be a certain level of

514
00:26:13,760 --> 00:26:17,000
Speaker 1: metaphysical understanding in the sense that I believe God exists

515
00:26:17,480 --> 00:26:21,240
Speaker 1: and God is we might not call that metaphysics. We

516
00:26:21,359 --> 00:26:24,240
Speaker 1: might not fully understand what it means for an immaterial

517
00:26:25,119 --> 00:26:27,720
Speaker 1: being to exist, but there has to be a certain

518
00:26:27,760 --> 00:26:30,399
Speaker 1: basis there. Part of the question is do I have

519
00:26:30,480 --> 00:26:34,800
Speaker 1: to metaphysically understand that God is three and one to

520
00:26:34,880 --> 00:26:37,520
Speaker 1: be saved? And it seems to me, I don't know.

521
00:26:37,560 --> 00:26:40,000
Speaker 1: Maybe this is some level of speculation, like I don't

522
00:26:40,040 --> 00:26:42,399
Speaker 1: know that somebody has to be able to articulate the

523
00:26:42,440 --> 00:26:44,239
Speaker 1: Trinity to be saved. You could always think of like

524
00:26:44,240 --> 00:26:47,160
Speaker 1: the Thief and the Cross clearly didn't understand that. He's

525
00:26:47,200 --> 00:26:51,720
Speaker 1: like the counter example for almost everything. But could you

526
00:26:52,040 --> 00:26:58,760
Speaker 1: deny the Trinity or proclaim doctrine that contradicts It seems

527
00:26:58,840 --> 00:27:03,000
Speaker 1: very different to me to underdevelop and not have a

528
00:27:03,040 --> 00:27:09,000
Speaker 1: full appreciation of than to affirm something that directly contradicts

529
00:27:09,080 --> 00:27:12,000
Speaker 1: the character of God. So I'd be inclined to say

530
00:27:12,000 --> 00:27:15,840
Speaker 1: that somebody could be saved without understanding the nuances and

531
00:27:15,920 --> 00:27:20,000
Speaker 1: depths of the Trinity. But to deny it would tell

532
00:27:20,040 --> 00:27:23,560
Speaker 1: me you're rejecting scripture as it is being revealed. And

533
00:27:23,600 --> 00:27:25,840
Speaker 1: it'd be hard to say somebody could be saved and

534
00:27:25,880 --> 00:27:29,280
Speaker 1: deny it unless they're like in process and open to

535
00:27:29,400 --> 00:27:33,040
Speaker 1: learning what scripture is teaching My nuance is too much agreed, discrete.

536
00:27:33,080 --> 00:27:33,800
Speaker 1: What's your take one?

537
00:27:34,080 --> 00:27:36,000
Speaker 2: I think that's right, and that's why I find it

538
00:27:36,000 --> 00:27:38,960
Speaker 2: helpful to even say the word trinity is commentary. So

539
00:27:38,960 --> 00:27:40,800
Speaker 2: if someone says, what if I don't believe in the Trinity,

540
00:27:40,800 --> 00:27:43,520
Speaker 2: can I be saved? I'd say, well, I don't know.

541
00:27:43,600 --> 00:27:45,239
Speaker 2: I mean, this is a traditional word, and it's how

542
00:27:45,280 --> 00:27:49,399
Speaker 2: we talk about it. Which element of the synthetic composition,

543
00:27:49,480 --> 00:27:51,679
Speaker 2: that is, the doctrine of the Trinity, which contains multiple

544
00:27:51,720 --> 00:27:54,280
Speaker 2: ideas within it. Which element of it are you having

545
00:27:54,320 --> 00:27:56,520
Speaker 2: a problem with? For instance, do you not think there's

546
00:27:56,560 --> 00:27:58,439
Speaker 2: a God? Because that's going to be a problem. Oh

547
00:27:58,480 --> 00:28:00,920
Speaker 2: you do, okay, we'll fine. I think Jesus is God

548
00:28:01,119 --> 00:28:03,440
Speaker 2: because that would be a problem. Do you think Jesus

549
00:28:03,480 --> 00:28:05,600
Speaker 2: simply is the Father? Because that would be a problem.

550
00:28:05,640 --> 00:28:07,240
Speaker 2: Like do you believe any of these things? And if

551
00:28:07,280 --> 00:28:08,840
Speaker 2: you go around that circle a couple of times and

552
00:28:08,880 --> 00:28:13,080
Speaker 2: paraphrase and approach each individual truth claim on its own,

553
00:28:13,400 --> 00:28:16,480
Speaker 2: talk about the biblical evidence for that truth claim, you

554
00:28:16,520 --> 00:28:17,680
Speaker 2: get to the end and they say, but I still

555
00:28:17,680 --> 00:28:20,880
Speaker 2: don't believe in the Trinity. You think, well, if all

556
00:28:20,920 --> 00:28:23,639
Speaker 2: it is is the tea word you're objecting to. That's weird.

557
00:28:23,760 --> 00:28:25,960
Speaker 2: I think you're a weird person, But I don't think

558
00:28:26,080 --> 00:28:29,960
Speaker 2: that's heretical because you don't seem to deny the biblical teaching,

559
00:28:30,240 --> 00:28:33,439
Speaker 2: the grounds, any of the elements that make up the

560
00:28:33,480 --> 00:28:34,760
Speaker 2: composite doctor of the Trinity.

561
00:28:35,720 --> 00:28:37,760
Speaker 1: Our friends, we're here on Talbot Tuesday. I'm here with

562
00:28:37,800 --> 00:28:41,640
Speaker 1: Fred Sanders, who's a bio of professor at Tory, and

563
00:28:41,680 --> 00:28:44,120
Speaker 1: we're kind of reacting, responding to some live questions about

564
00:28:44,160 --> 00:28:47,560
Speaker 1: the Trinity. And by the way, just for those listening,

565
00:28:47,720 --> 00:28:49,800
Speaker 1: you have written on this a lot. Tell us one

566
00:28:49,880 --> 00:28:51,560
Speaker 1: or two books that you've written. You did the one

567
00:28:51,560 --> 00:28:53,480
Speaker 1: in the Holy Spirit or on the Trinity that people

568
00:28:53,480 --> 00:28:55,840
Speaker 1: go you know what? I like this guy, Fred, I

569
00:28:55,920 --> 00:28:59,120
Speaker 1: want to read some stuff. Give a quick commercial at

570
00:28:59,200 --> 00:29:00,560
Speaker 1: my request for you're writing.

571
00:29:01,520 --> 00:29:03,800
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, if you like what Fred said about the Trinity,

572
00:29:03,840 --> 00:29:06,000
Speaker 2: my stuff's all at fredfredfred dot com.

573
00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:08,800
Speaker 1: There's three freds fredsfredfred dot com.

574
00:29:08,840 --> 00:29:09,120
Speaker 2: That's it.

575
00:29:09,280 --> 00:29:10,880
Speaker 1: Oh, that's hilarious. That's Trinity.

576
00:29:12,120 --> 00:29:13,840
Speaker 2: So when I guess speaking to church and someone says,

577
00:29:13,840 --> 00:29:15,680
Speaker 2: I haven't heardnyone talk quite that way about it before,

578
00:29:15,840 --> 00:29:18,040
Speaker 2: where can I look for that the answer is Fredfredfred

579
00:29:18,040 --> 00:29:20,000
Speaker 2: dot com keeps being funny the first five or six

580
00:29:20,040 --> 00:29:20,720
Speaker 2: times you say it.

581
00:29:20,840 --> 00:29:23,920
Speaker 1: So articles, books links there for Peter to go first.

582
00:29:24,080 --> 00:29:26,000
Speaker 2: Everything I can give away for free is free there.

583
00:29:26,040 --> 00:29:27,680
Speaker 2: And then there's my books that are still in print.

584
00:29:27,720 --> 00:29:30,600
Speaker 2: So my most important book on the Trinity at a

585
00:29:30,720 --> 00:29:33,560
Speaker 2: not very high academic level is The Deep Things of God,

586
00:29:33,680 --> 00:29:37,080
Speaker 2: How the Trinity Changes Everything. That's crossway. There's a second edition.

587
00:29:37,320 --> 00:29:39,600
Speaker 2: There is also the short book on the Holy Spirit

588
00:29:39,640 --> 00:29:43,680
Speaker 2: and Introduction. Those are the biggest. I've also got a yeah,

589
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:45,640
Speaker 2: those are the important ones on the Doctor of the Trinity.

590
00:29:45,800 --> 00:29:47,760
Speaker 2: All right, here's one I'm not academically. I've got a

591
00:29:47,760 --> 00:29:49,360
Speaker 2: big green book called the Triune God.

592
00:29:49,640 --> 00:29:54,160
Speaker 1: The Triune God. Okay, excellent. So here's one I don't

593
00:29:54,400 --> 00:29:56,880
Speaker 1: Sometimes when stuff is written, it's hard to know how

594
00:29:56,960 --> 00:29:59,680
Speaker 1: much of it is sarcastic or critical. I don't know,

595
00:29:59,680 --> 00:30:04,920
Speaker 1: but it's it's interesting. This is a comment written into YouTube.

596
00:30:05,880 --> 00:30:09,440
Speaker 1: It says a seven headed godhead would be even better

597
00:30:09,600 --> 00:30:14,000
Speaker 1: in my opinion, is any religion offering that now? Presumably not.

598
00:30:14,760 --> 00:30:17,880
Speaker 1: I do think the chronic version of oneness is easier

599
00:30:17,880 --> 00:30:21,640
Speaker 1: to grasp for most people. Now my suspicion is that

600
00:30:21,680 --> 00:30:25,280
Speaker 1: this is a Muslim who's being critical and rejecting the

601
00:30:25,320 --> 00:30:29,239
Speaker 1: trinity because it just sounds so complex we can't understand it.

602
00:30:29,640 --> 00:30:35,080
Speaker 1: The Kran offers a simpler, easier position to grasp. So

603
00:30:35,240 --> 00:30:37,800
Speaker 1: if God is three, and presumably think three is better

604
00:30:37,800 --> 00:30:41,400
Speaker 1: than one, then wouldn't seven be better than three? What's

605
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:43,160
Speaker 1: your take when you hear an objection like this?

606
00:30:44,400 --> 00:30:46,640
Speaker 2: Yeah, so that kind of objection put that way is

607
00:30:46,680 --> 00:30:49,560
Speaker 2: clearly from the outside, Like it's when you don't understand

608
00:30:49,600 --> 00:30:51,920
Speaker 2: the inner reasons for why something is there and you're

609
00:30:51,960 --> 00:30:54,720
Speaker 2: just sort of saying, well, if three is good, seven's better.

610
00:30:54,880 --> 00:30:59,160
Speaker 2: You know, that's a that person is sort of epistemically

611
00:30:59,200 --> 00:31:02,200
Speaker 2: located out side the conversation. He's trying to understand, and

612
00:31:02,280 --> 00:31:04,000
Speaker 2: you know, we don't do well with that. My doctor

613
00:31:04,040 --> 00:31:05,640
Speaker 2: tells me stuff about my health and I was like,

614
00:31:05,720 --> 00:31:08,680
Speaker 2: I don't know, you're saying there's stuff inside. You know,

615
00:31:08,240 --> 00:31:14,440
Speaker 2: I got to understand some other reasons. You could, though,

616
00:31:14,480 --> 00:31:16,880
Speaker 2: pursue this and say, well, let's talk about that. You know,

617
00:31:16,880 --> 00:31:19,120
Speaker 2: there are ninety nine names of God in the Quran.

618
00:31:19,320 --> 00:31:21,840
Speaker 2: Why isn't each of them somebody or any of them

619
00:31:21,880 --> 00:31:24,960
Speaker 2: somebody what about angels or any of them somebody or

620
00:31:25,000 --> 00:31:28,240
Speaker 2: are we dealing with personal realities in any of these cases? Well, now,

621
00:31:28,280 --> 00:31:32,600
Speaker 2: in the Christian scriptures, are there any divine attributes or

622
00:31:32,640 --> 00:31:36,640
Speaker 2: divine agents or or things things? Are persons coming out

623
00:31:36,680 --> 00:31:39,239
Speaker 2: as from God that we think I'm pretty sure that

624
00:31:39,280 --> 00:31:41,760
Speaker 2: actually counts as somebody. You kind of start there and

625
00:31:41,800 --> 00:31:43,640
Speaker 2: you realize, oh, well, now we have to actually scan

626
00:31:43,720 --> 00:31:46,760
Speaker 2: available data. And this guy Jesus, who turns out is

627
00:31:46,800 --> 00:31:49,720
Speaker 2: the word incarnate, is someone we have to reckon with.

628
00:31:50,280 --> 00:31:52,400
Speaker 2: I don't have to say grace comes from God as well.

629
00:31:52,400 --> 00:31:55,440
Speaker 2: I wonder if grace is somebody that's not. That doesn't

630
00:31:55,480 --> 00:31:57,800
Speaker 2: make any sense to even raise that question. There just

631
00:31:57,840 --> 00:32:02,640
Speaker 2: aren't that many candidates for in the way God is

632
00:32:02,640 --> 00:32:05,320
Speaker 2: present to us in Christian salvation, you end up with

633
00:32:05,360 --> 00:32:06,040
Speaker 2: exactly three.

634
00:32:07,040 --> 00:32:08,920
Speaker 1: That's a great take. So for me, why do I

635
00:32:08,920 --> 00:32:11,240
Speaker 1: believe in three? Because I believe this is how God

636
00:32:11,280 --> 00:32:14,640
Speaker 1: has revealed himself from the scriptures. Now this is a

637
00:32:14,720 --> 00:32:16,640
Speaker 1: Muslim and they're arguing for the Krean, and I'm arguing

638
00:32:16,680 --> 00:32:20,440
Speaker 1: the Bible's true separate conversation we're not having here. So

639
00:32:20,520 --> 00:32:22,720
Speaker 1: part of it is if the Bible's true, and I

640
00:32:22,720 --> 00:32:25,800
Speaker 1: believe I can make that case. Then the trinity is

641
00:32:25,840 --> 00:32:29,360
Speaker 1: a word we use to capture the character of God,

642
00:32:29,480 --> 00:32:33,360
Speaker 1: how he's revealed himself. Now, one way I think three

643
00:32:33,680 --> 00:32:39,760
Speaker 1: is superior philosophically is there's a sense where at least

644
00:32:40,120 --> 00:32:43,560
Speaker 1: if I love, if I'm loved by my very nature,

645
00:32:43,640 --> 00:32:47,760
Speaker 1: there needs to be another that I love. Needs to

646
00:32:47,800 --> 00:32:52,640
Speaker 1: be diversity built into the character of God, where a

647
00:32:53,080 --> 00:32:58,080
Speaker 1: Muslim view of God, who is a single entity, cannot

648
00:32:58,200 --> 00:33:03,720
Speaker 1: love until Allah creates and then has a being to love.

649
00:33:03,840 --> 00:33:07,680
Speaker 1: So it's arguably not the maximually great being. Now, how

650
00:33:07,720 --> 00:33:10,000
Speaker 1: you get to three, there's a whole Craig and I

651
00:33:10,080 --> 00:33:12,120
Speaker 1: talked about this is in death. I won't go into

652
00:33:12,200 --> 00:33:15,240
Speaker 1: it here, but I think there's something that a second

653
00:33:15,240 --> 00:33:18,800
Speaker 1: and a third ad that four, five, and six don't add.

654
00:33:19,120 --> 00:33:20,920
Speaker 1: So I think we get there from scripture, and I

655
00:33:20,960 --> 00:33:24,280
Speaker 1: think we'll get there outside of scripture. But rather than

656
00:33:24,360 --> 00:33:26,560
Speaker 1: just kind of mocking and making fun and going well,

657
00:33:26,600 --> 00:33:29,480
Speaker 1: seven is better, I think you're right that reflects not

658
00:33:29,680 --> 00:33:36,240
Speaker 1: understanding what Christians believe and why they really believe it. Okay,

659
00:33:36,880 --> 00:33:39,520
Speaker 1: here's one this person wrote again, word for word in

660
00:33:39,520 --> 00:33:42,480
Speaker 1: and commentary. Are we to think of God as a

661
00:33:42,840 --> 00:33:47,080
Speaker 1: soul with three minds. I think this is maybe directed

662
00:33:47,120 --> 00:33:48,560
Speaker 1: at Craig, so you can just give you your take

663
00:33:48,600 --> 00:33:51,280
Speaker 1: on this. I know you say he's endowed with three

664
00:33:51,280 --> 00:33:56,920
Speaker 1: centers of consciousness. Are those centers of self consciousness minds?

665
00:33:56,960 --> 00:33:59,960
Speaker 1: So maybe Fred you can't obviously speak for doctor Craig

666
00:34:00,200 --> 00:34:02,760
Speaker 1: in his model. But one of the things that people

667
00:34:02,800 --> 00:34:07,040
Speaker 1: are debating on is that, like, did Jesus have two wills?

668
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:11,399
Speaker 1: How many wills are in the godhead? Is there one

669
00:34:11,480 --> 00:34:13,560
Speaker 1: will that's God and then three the Father's son in

670
00:34:13,560 --> 00:34:15,719
Speaker 1: the Holy Spirit? Now we have four? Is there the

671
00:34:15,800 --> 00:34:18,160
Speaker 1: Father and then the Holy Spirit has a will? But

672
00:34:18,200 --> 00:34:21,680
Speaker 1: then Jesus has two? That's four? Like it gets crazy

673
00:34:21,800 --> 00:34:25,440
Speaker 1: to think about this. Yeah, And part of Craig's model

674
00:34:26,280 --> 00:34:30,720
Speaker 1: is that there's one soul who is God in being,

675
00:34:31,400 --> 00:34:35,759
Speaker 1: but three centers of consciousness. Now, we tend to associate

676
00:34:35,920 --> 00:34:39,759
Speaker 1: a center of consciousness with a soul because that's our experience.

677
00:34:40,239 --> 00:34:44,200
Speaker 1: But God could be a more ritually endowed soul that

678
00:34:44,280 --> 00:34:47,520
Speaker 1: has three centers of consciousness. That's what I think this

679
00:34:47,680 --> 00:34:52,120
Speaker 1: question is reflecting either commented on this or your take.

680
00:34:52,239 --> 00:34:55,000
Speaker 1: What's your take on the multiple wills or the centers

681
00:34:55,040 --> 00:34:57,719
Speaker 1: of consciousness in God to make us to make sense

682
00:34:57,719 --> 00:34:59,360
Speaker 1: of the fact that the Father is talking to the

683
00:34:59,400 --> 00:35:02,359
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit, sending the Holy Spirit, Like, how do we

684
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,359
Speaker 1: make sense that biblical data as you see it?

685
00:35:05,440 --> 00:35:09,000
Speaker 2: Yeah, So when we talk about the Father being a

686
00:35:09,040 --> 00:35:11,759
Speaker 2: person and the Son being a person and they're personally

687
00:35:11,920 --> 00:35:15,520
Speaker 2: involved with each other, it's tempting once we've sort of

688
00:35:15,520 --> 00:35:17,399
Speaker 2: grabbed that word and we're trying to explain, like what's

689
00:35:17,400 --> 00:35:19,800
Speaker 2: going on. The Father sends the Sun, and they're distinct,

690
00:35:19,920 --> 00:35:24,759
Speaker 2: but they're one being, one essence. Once we come up

691
00:35:24,800 --> 00:35:26,440
Speaker 2: with the word person to put on that, it's tempting

692
00:35:26,480 --> 00:35:28,839
Speaker 2: to sort of free associate everything we know about every

693
00:35:28,880 --> 00:35:31,640
Speaker 2: person we've ever met from observation and say that must

694
00:35:31,680 --> 00:35:33,239
Speaker 2: be what is true of God. So when we say

695
00:35:33,280 --> 00:35:35,279
Speaker 2: there's three of those in God, then let's say you're

696
00:35:35,320 --> 00:35:37,640
Speaker 2: a person, I'm a person. Well, let's populate a list

697
00:35:37,680 --> 00:35:39,200
Speaker 2: here of what makes me a person and you a person.

698
00:35:39,560 --> 00:35:43,040
Speaker 2: And so that's dangerous because while there's some analogical connection

699
00:35:43,160 --> 00:35:46,080
Speaker 2: between three persons in God and multiple persons in creation,

700
00:35:46,920 --> 00:35:51,960
Speaker 2: it's not direct unifical language. Right. The three persons of

701
00:35:51,960 --> 00:35:55,280
Speaker 2: the Trinity are persons in a different way than created.

702
00:35:55,600 --> 00:35:59,840
Speaker 2: Finite persons are persons for one thing, they are infinite

703
00:36:00,239 --> 00:36:02,879
Speaker 2: for another thing. You can't have one without the other,

704
00:36:04,880 --> 00:36:07,960
Speaker 2: like not even potentially. You can't define a person of

705
00:36:07,960 --> 00:36:11,920
Speaker 2: the Trinity considered absolutely without reference to another person of

706
00:36:11,960 --> 00:36:15,160
Speaker 2: the Trinity anything. If you try to ignore the Son

707
00:36:15,160 --> 00:36:17,120
Speaker 2: and the Spirit and just say things about the Father,

708
00:36:17,760 --> 00:36:21,080
Speaker 2: everything you say will only apply to the divine Being,

709
00:36:21,160 --> 00:36:24,640
Speaker 2: the divine essence. It's only when you ask how are

710
00:36:24,640 --> 00:36:27,040
Speaker 2: the Father and the Son related that you can begin

711
00:36:27,520 --> 00:36:31,800
Speaker 2: predicating relationally. You can start making statements. Even the names

712
00:36:32,000 --> 00:36:36,040
Speaker 2: father and son given to us in Scripture are relationally oriented.

713
00:36:36,800 --> 00:36:39,560
Speaker 2: Father of the Son, Son of the Father. It's less

714
00:36:39,560 --> 00:36:42,240
Speaker 2: clear in English with the Spirit, but spirit or breath

715
00:36:42,560 --> 00:36:43,200
Speaker 2: of the Father.

716
00:36:43,719 --> 00:36:46,160
Speaker 1: Okay, So when you say you can't have one without

717
00:36:46,200 --> 00:36:48,440
Speaker 1: the other, yeah, make it distingtion here, because in our

718
00:36:48,480 --> 00:36:50,160
Speaker 1: minds we can go, oh, I can talk about the

719
00:36:50,200 --> 00:36:53,279
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit without the others. I can talk about the

720
00:36:53,320 --> 00:36:56,440
Speaker 1: Father without the Son. You're not saying in terms of

721
00:36:56,600 --> 00:37:01,080
Speaker 1: understanding or logically, You're saying, if God, God is this

722
00:37:01,280 --> 00:37:05,759
Speaker 1: try personal being. Yes, one cannot and will not and

723
00:37:05,880 --> 00:37:11,160
Speaker 1: does not exist apart distinct from the others. That's a

724
00:37:11,719 --> 00:37:15,480
Speaker 1: not a logical that's a metaphysical impossibility.

725
00:37:14,840 --> 00:37:17,920
Speaker 2: Right, Okay. And so to talk about a center of

726
00:37:17,960 --> 00:37:21,439
Speaker 2: consciousness like their center of consciousness A, and then what's

727
00:37:21,480 --> 00:37:24,200
Speaker 2: the difference between that and center of consciousness B. Well,

728
00:37:24,400 --> 00:37:28,280
Speaker 2: A is A and B is B. They're otherwise exactly similar,

729
00:37:28,960 --> 00:37:32,240
Speaker 2: and they're both God. But since they are distinct centers

730
00:37:32,280 --> 00:37:36,239
Speaker 2: of consciousness, then they are distinct persons. See that's the

731
00:37:36,280 --> 00:37:39,080
Speaker 2: hard edge of social trinitarianism. It's used as a way

732
00:37:39,160 --> 00:37:43,799
Speaker 2: of distinguishing the two persons without mentioning their relations. But

733
00:37:43,880 --> 00:37:47,680
Speaker 2: the Bible mentions their relations, leads with their relations. I

734
00:37:47,680 --> 00:37:49,800
Speaker 2: believe in the Father, Son and Spirit is a directly

735
00:37:49,840 --> 00:37:52,800
Speaker 2: biblical statement. I believe in three persons of the Trinity

736
00:37:53,320 --> 00:37:57,480
Speaker 2: is a conceptual abstraction commentary to help us say what

737
00:37:57,520 --> 00:37:59,719
Speaker 2: we mean a little bit better. But you can't route

738
00:37:59,719 --> 00:38:01,800
Speaker 2: yourself out of the relations. The father son relation is

739
00:38:01,800 --> 00:38:02,400
Speaker 2: what's revealed.

740
00:38:02,840 --> 00:38:06,080
Speaker 1: Okay, So do you have I understanding Craig kind of

741
00:38:06,120 --> 00:38:10,439
Speaker 1: a hybrid view that says they are distinct persons. There's

742
00:38:10,480 --> 00:38:17,560
Speaker 1: the distinct center of consciousness, and so that's used to

743
00:38:17,719 --> 00:38:21,000
Speaker 1: draw out the distinctions between Father's Son and Holy Spirit

744
00:38:21,120 --> 00:38:25,080
Speaker 1: to keep the try in trinity, but we can't leave

745
00:38:25,120 --> 00:38:30,600
Speaker 1: it at that. There also are relational distinctions that are

746
00:38:30,719 --> 00:38:35,560
Speaker 1: inherent to who and what God is, but without necessarily

747
00:38:35,600 --> 00:38:40,960
Speaker 1: bringing in the subordination component of how that is usually

748
00:38:41,080 --> 00:38:45,400
Speaker 1: cashed out. It helped me kind of frame this a

749
00:38:45,400 --> 00:38:47,040
Speaker 1: little bit, so if I could take a step back,

750
00:38:47,080 --> 00:38:50,319
Speaker 1: we have the center of consciousness. There's threeness, but there's

751
00:38:50,360 --> 00:38:55,000
Speaker 1: also the relationship, which implies others. You're saying, both of

752
00:38:55,000 --> 00:38:58,200
Speaker 1: those are essential to who and what God is, and

753
00:38:58,239 --> 00:38:59,200
Speaker 1: get it the threeness.

754
00:39:00,640 --> 00:39:05,480
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, Although traditionally we lead with the relation. The

755
00:39:05,880 --> 00:39:08,080
Speaker 2: only way, okay, you're going to be able to say

756
00:39:08,120 --> 00:39:10,960
Speaker 2: anything that distinguishes the son from the father is to

757
00:39:10,960 --> 00:39:14,000
Speaker 2: say how the son is related to the father. Sometimes

758
00:39:14,000 --> 00:39:16,279
Speaker 2: we'll put this traditional theological put this in terms of, well,

759
00:39:16,280 --> 00:39:18,040
Speaker 2: there's a distinguishing mark that makes the son the son.

760
00:39:18,080 --> 00:39:20,759
Speaker 2: It's like sonship. Okay, but that's kind of cheating, right.

761
00:39:20,880 --> 00:39:24,439
Speaker 2: Sonship means son of father. If you say sonship makes

762
00:39:24,440 --> 00:39:26,040
Speaker 2: the son the son, what you mean is he's son

763
00:39:26,080 --> 00:39:28,560
Speaker 2: of the father. You're cheating the relation back in, Well,

764
00:39:28,920 --> 00:39:31,520
Speaker 2: that's actually what's revealed. What's revealed is the relation of

765
00:39:31,560 --> 00:39:35,239
Speaker 2: father and son. You don't have trinity person one and

766
00:39:35,280 --> 00:39:38,799
Speaker 2: trinity person two. And then as a later logical move, say, gee,

767
00:39:38,840 --> 00:39:40,239
Speaker 2: you know, it just occurred to me, I wonder how

768
00:39:40,239 --> 00:39:43,080
Speaker 2: those two are related to each other. The relation was

769
00:39:43,160 --> 00:39:46,240
Speaker 2: always primal in the revelation because the relation is always

770
00:39:46,280 --> 00:39:50,040
Speaker 2: primal in how there is distinction within the one God.

771
00:39:51,080 --> 00:39:52,920
Speaker 2: Now okay, yeah, okay.

772
00:39:53,000 --> 00:39:57,400
Speaker 1: So the reason that is traditional is because this is

773
00:39:58,040 --> 00:40:02,000
Speaker 1: the revealed language and story we have in the Bible,

774
00:40:02,640 --> 00:40:06,239
Speaker 1: and any doctrine of the character of God has to

775
00:40:06,280 --> 00:40:11,719
Speaker 1: begin with revealed the father and the son relational language.

776
00:40:11,760 --> 00:40:13,640
Speaker 1: So if we take a step back, God could have

777
00:40:13,760 --> 00:40:19,520
Speaker 1: used any language to describe himself, presumably, but he chose

778
00:40:19,560 --> 00:40:25,600
Speaker 1: father son language, and that's that's inherently relational, right and

779
00:40:25,800 --> 00:40:28,920
Speaker 1: isn't so Traditionally this isn't viewed as just well, this

780
00:40:29,000 --> 00:40:32,280
Speaker 1: is only in the incarnation of that God javidos here,

781
00:40:32,880 --> 00:40:36,040
Speaker 1: this is telling us something about who God is inherently.

782
00:40:36,640 --> 00:40:39,280
Speaker 1: Now what that is, We've got to go answer further.

783
00:40:39,760 --> 00:40:43,480
Speaker 1: But traditionally you're telling me the doctrine trinity is relationally

784
00:40:43,760 --> 00:40:48,360
Speaker 1: that is built into who God is. Hence He's chosen

785
00:40:48,440 --> 00:40:50,640
Speaker 1: to reveal himself in relational language.

786
00:40:50,800 --> 00:40:54,399
Speaker 2: Yeah, God, he exists and reveals himself as father, son

787
00:40:54,440 --> 00:40:57,879
Speaker 2: and Spirit. So it's a dangerous abstraction to start from

788
00:40:57,960 --> 00:41:00,759
Speaker 2: what's revealed in scripture and say, let me abstract from

789
00:41:00,800 --> 00:41:04,800
Speaker 2: that some logical principles. For instance, there is one divine essence,

790
00:41:04,880 --> 00:41:08,000
Speaker 2: there are three distinct persons. Those persons or centers of consciousness.

791
00:41:08,000 --> 00:41:11,600
Speaker 2: That's how they're different. They're distinct centers of consciousness. That's

792
00:41:11,640 --> 00:41:15,319
Speaker 2: an abstraction, right, And if you then use that to

793
00:41:15,400 --> 00:41:18,759
Speaker 2: judge the revelation, that's a problem. Everyone's trying to be

794
00:41:18,760 --> 00:41:21,319
Speaker 2: biblical here, but there's a move to where you see

795
00:41:21,320 --> 00:41:23,759
Speaker 2: the three to one thing in such a way that

796
00:41:23,840 --> 00:41:25,839
Speaker 2: the relations of father, son and Spirit to each other

797
00:41:25,920 --> 00:41:28,120
Speaker 2: doesn't need to be mentioned at all. If you can

798
00:41:28,160 --> 00:41:30,719
Speaker 2: do your trinitarian theology and not talk about their relations,

799
00:41:31,040 --> 00:41:34,200
Speaker 2: you're not doing it right. You've taken this side road

800
00:41:34,680 --> 00:41:39,319
Speaker 2: through an abstract set of conceptions, and then you're someone

801
00:41:39,360 --> 00:41:40,040
Speaker 2: who puts it together.

802
00:41:40,080 --> 00:41:40,239
Speaker 1: Well.

803
00:41:40,280 --> 00:41:42,400
Speaker 2: I remember one of the questions asked about Tom McCall's

804
00:41:42,440 --> 00:41:45,920
Speaker 2: of you. Tom McCall's a systematic theelogion a Hasbury Seminary

805
00:41:45,960 --> 00:41:48,319
Speaker 2: in Kentucky, and he's written a couple of books on

806
00:41:48,320 --> 00:41:50,880
Speaker 2: the Trinity where he does a pretty good job of

807
00:41:50,920 --> 00:41:53,920
Speaker 2: being sort of more. He wouldn't use the word classical.

808
00:41:54,520 --> 00:41:56,720
Speaker 2: In the book Two Views of the Trinity, he writes

809
00:41:56,800 --> 00:42:00,719
Speaker 2: one of the four chapters, it's a little confusing, which

810
00:42:00,719 --> 00:42:04,759
Speaker 2: he calls the relational and creedle of you and you

811
00:42:04,880 --> 00:42:07,640
Speaker 2: kind of seeing that language, right, it's relational. The Father

812
00:42:07,719 --> 00:42:10,320
Speaker 2: loves the son. Sometimes really clear about if you to

813
00:42:10,360 --> 00:42:12,040
Speaker 2: a point where you're so clear about the oneness of

814
00:42:12,080 --> 00:42:14,799
Speaker 2: God that you can't say the Father really loves the son,

815
00:42:15,040 --> 00:42:17,560
Speaker 2: you've messed something up. And I would affirm there. Right,

816
00:42:17,600 --> 00:42:20,560
Speaker 2: we're trying to understand what's revealed, and if anything is revealed,

817
00:42:20,560 --> 00:42:23,040
Speaker 2: we know the Father loves the son, so he wants

818
00:42:23,080 --> 00:42:25,520
Speaker 2: to affirm that. But he also calls it creedle because

819
00:42:25,680 --> 00:42:28,000
Speaker 2: he wants to do it in a nice way, affirming

820
00:42:28,040 --> 00:42:30,680
Speaker 2: things like the eternal generation of the son from the Father.

821
00:42:31,680 --> 00:42:33,879
Speaker 1: So see common here says the problem is they start

822
00:42:33,920 --> 00:42:36,240
Speaker 1: from the premise the Bible is true. I would plead

823
00:42:36,320 --> 00:42:39,440
Speaker 1: one hundred percent guilty on that one. Now this conversation,

824
00:42:39,640 --> 00:42:41,759
Speaker 1: we're starting with the premise the Bible's shoe because we're

825
00:42:41,760 --> 00:42:45,360
Speaker 1: trying to make sense of this doctrine. I don't assume

826
00:42:45,360 --> 00:42:47,719
Speaker 1: the Bible's chee. I can make a case for that,

827
00:42:48,280 --> 00:42:51,839
Speaker 1: but that is definitely assumption here. I would completely own

828
00:42:51,920 --> 00:42:55,719
Speaker 1: that one, not pretending otherwise. Here's a question. I don't

829
00:42:55,840 --> 00:42:57,600
Speaker 1: know where you'll go. This one is says why didn't

830
00:42:57,640 --> 00:43:03,000
Speaker 1: God choose triplets or brothers rather than father and son?

831
00:43:03,800 --> 00:43:07,680
Speaker 1: Any thoughts on why God wouldn't choose triplets would seem

832
00:43:07,920 --> 00:43:12,640
Speaker 1: to apply more parody, and brothers seemly said than father

833
00:43:12,719 --> 00:43:15,680
Speaker 1: and son. So why wouldn't God choose that example?

834
00:43:17,120 --> 00:43:18,759
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a good question. And at some point you

835
00:43:19,440 --> 00:43:21,359
Speaker 2: think when, at what point will I lay my hand

836
00:43:21,360 --> 00:43:23,880
Speaker 2: over my mouth and not not say anything else about this?

837
00:43:24,000 --> 00:43:25,400
Speaker 1: I wonder if you were to say that.

838
00:43:26,400 --> 00:43:28,319
Speaker 2: And you can imagine if you were making up how

839
00:43:28,360 --> 00:43:30,880
Speaker 2: God should have revealed cool things, you could say like

840
00:43:31,000 --> 00:43:33,680
Speaker 2: three friends would have been better, because then Jesus calls

841
00:43:33,760 --> 00:43:35,200
Speaker 2: us friends and we would all get in on the

842
00:43:35,200 --> 00:43:38,399
Speaker 2: friendship and it would be a big, large, egalitarian opening

843
00:43:38,440 --> 00:43:42,600
Speaker 2: up of a friendship circle. Yeah, what's revealed is father, son,

844
00:43:42,640 --> 00:43:45,280
Speaker 2: and Holy Spirit. And even to look at those terms

845
00:43:45,280 --> 00:43:48,680
Speaker 2: and realize how much is in that self and aming

846
00:43:48,760 --> 00:43:52,680
Speaker 2: of God to realize that father and son necessarily require

847
00:43:52,760 --> 00:43:55,239
Speaker 2: each other fur their identity father of the son, son

848
00:43:55,280 --> 00:43:58,000
Speaker 2: of the father, and you think, okay, I get it.

849
00:43:58,040 --> 00:44:01,120
Speaker 2: You're doing family names to tell me about this ineffable, divine,

850
00:44:01,160 --> 00:44:05,759
Speaker 2: eternal reality that's you know above where we are father's son.

851
00:44:05,800 --> 00:44:08,080
Speaker 2: And then what what's the third family member? You start

852
00:44:08,160 --> 00:44:14,640
Speaker 2: thinking other son, uncle, like wife, mom, a grandson. What

853
00:44:14,760 --> 00:44:19,120
Speaker 2: you realize, no, no other family word is going to work.

854
00:44:19,400 --> 00:44:21,719
Speaker 2: And then you look at the revelation and say, right, father, son,

855
00:44:21,760 --> 00:44:26,360
Speaker 2: and Holy Spirit. It's a very unusual name, you know,

856
00:44:26,400 --> 00:44:28,600
Speaker 2: it's it's not a family name for one thing, like, okay,

857
00:44:28,640 --> 00:44:31,840
Speaker 2: here's a pattern, father and son. Third thing is very different.

858
00:44:32,520 --> 00:44:35,320
Speaker 2: It's not a clearly relational name. It's relational in the

859
00:44:35,360 --> 00:44:38,239
Speaker 2: sense that spirit means breath, and so you know, the

860
00:44:38,239 --> 00:44:41,880
Speaker 2: son comes from the father by being sonned or affiliated

861
00:44:42,040 --> 00:44:45,160
Speaker 2: or begotten. The spirit comes from the Father by being

862
00:44:45,200 --> 00:44:48,640
Speaker 2: breathed out, coming forth from the Father in this other way.

863
00:44:49,680 --> 00:44:51,759
Speaker 2: That's not a family image, but it's some kind of

864
00:44:54,280 --> 00:44:55,920
Speaker 2: It's not my job to critique the name that the

865
00:44:55,920 --> 00:44:58,360
Speaker 2: Holy Spirit gives himself, but it is neither a family

866
00:44:58,480 --> 00:45:02,080
Speaker 2: name that which wouldn't tidally complete the triad. Nor is

867
00:45:02,120 --> 00:45:05,400
Speaker 2: it obviously a personal name like Spirit is a kind

868
00:45:05,400 --> 00:45:09,960
Speaker 2: of an impersonal image, right, and it's not a very

869
00:45:09,960 --> 00:45:11,880
Speaker 2: distinct name for a person. All three persons of the

870
00:45:11,880 --> 00:45:14,920
Speaker 2: Trinity or Holy all three persons of the Trinity are Spirit,

871
00:45:15,719 --> 00:45:18,719
Speaker 2: but we are taught to the name. We have to

872
00:45:18,800 --> 00:45:21,120
Speaker 2: identify this third one is the Holy Spirit.

873
00:45:22,280 --> 00:45:23,880
Speaker 1: I love you said, what point do I put my

874
00:45:23,920 --> 00:45:26,160
Speaker 1: hand over my mouth and not try to get.

875
00:45:26,160 --> 00:45:26,879
Speaker 2: Maybe a minute ago?

876
00:45:26,960 --> 00:45:29,799
Speaker 1: Right? You know? No, No, my point was not that

877
00:45:29,840 --> 00:45:32,240
Speaker 1: you did that. My point must have a certain caution.

878
00:45:32,400 --> 00:45:34,640
Speaker 1: Greg cocoal friend mentor of mine. I know you know him,

879
00:45:34,640 --> 00:45:37,279
Speaker 1: he says, whenever you ask you a question, why does

880
00:45:37,320 --> 00:45:39,359
Speaker 1: God do this or why does he not do that?

881
00:45:40,120 --> 00:45:43,439
Speaker 1: We actually don't know the answer unless God tells us

882
00:45:44,200 --> 00:45:46,600
Speaker 1: at some point we have to kind of guess. But

883
00:45:46,680 --> 00:45:50,120
Speaker 1: it is so interesting that you're saying. This relational component

884
00:45:50,239 --> 00:45:54,080
Speaker 1: about how God revealed himself as Father and Son is

885
00:45:54,160 --> 00:45:58,240
Speaker 1: built into who and what God is, But the Holy

886
00:45:58,280 --> 00:46:01,919
Speaker 1: Spirit is not related like the Father and the Son.

887
00:46:03,040 --> 00:46:03,920
Speaker 1: Why or why not?

888
00:46:04,600 --> 00:46:04,799
Speaker 2: You know?

889
00:46:04,880 --> 00:46:08,360
Speaker 1: I don't know. I can't answer that. I wonder, you know,

890
00:46:08,400 --> 00:46:12,839
Speaker 1: if God was triplets, there's still different levels of authority, well,

891
00:46:12,880 --> 00:46:15,879
Speaker 1: which one was born first? Yeah, I mean I don't

892
00:46:15,920 --> 00:46:18,600
Speaker 1: know that it would avoid some of the same problems

893
00:46:18,640 --> 00:46:20,680
Speaker 1: that we have. You still have a God who is

894
00:46:21,320 --> 00:46:26,560
Speaker 1: one in being three persons, and there's no perfect analogy

895
00:46:26,600 --> 00:46:30,120
Speaker 1: that captures this. They all err on some way now

896
00:46:30,160 --> 00:46:31,799
Speaker 1: that used to bother me in the past. I'm like,

897
00:46:31,840 --> 00:46:34,160
Speaker 1: why I need analogy to understand this? And I think

898
00:46:34,200 --> 00:46:36,000
Speaker 1: I've told you this with my students. When I was

899
00:46:36,040 --> 00:46:37,719
Speaker 1: seeing in high school full time before I came here

900
00:46:37,760 --> 00:46:39,560
Speaker 1: to Buyela, I was like, give me analogay to Trinity,

901
00:46:39,560 --> 00:46:42,759
Speaker 1: And one girl's like a peanut Eminem. She's so proud

902
00:46:42,760 --> 00:46:46,239
Speaker 1: of herself. She's like chocolate, peanut and shell. I was like,

903
00:46:46,320 --> 00:46:50,719
Speaker 1: we are comparing the infinite, eternal God to a Eminem.

904
00:46:51,560 --> 00:46:55,440
Speaker 1: I wonder if this whole exercise has gone south somewhere.

905
00:46:56,239 --> 00:46:58,600
Speaker 1: And so it really doesn't bother me as much that

906
00:46:58,640 --> 00:47:02,560
Speaker 1: we don't have a perfect analogy because this is God's character.

907
00:47:04,120 --> 00:47:07,320
Speaker 2: Okay. The other thing, the Triplet's kind of an intuition

908
00:47:07,440 --> 00:47:10,200
Speaker 2: that's going on on the triplets question is if God

909
00:47:10,200 --> 00:47:13,880
Speaker 2: intends to reveal threeness, then triplets would be a pretty

910
00:47:13,880 --> 00:47:16,240
Speaker 2: good way of revealing that. Okay, But if God intends

911
00:47:16,280 --> 00:47:19,680
Speaker 2: to reveal a relation, a relationship that is in the

912
00:47:19,680 --> 00:47:22,000
Speaker 2: life of the living God, triplets aren't going to do

913
00:47:22,040 --> 00:47:24,640
Speaker 2: it right because it leaves it gets you this in

914
00:47:24,640 --> 00:47:26,920
Speaker 2: my mind, I picture three unmarked billiard balls, and you're

915
00:47:26,920 --> 00:47:29,759
Speaker 2: wondering which one's the eight ball, because all you know

916
00:47:29,840 --> 00:47:34,040
Speaker 2: is that they're distinct. They're different centers of billiard. But

917
00:47:34,440 --> 00:47:38,080
Speaker 2: that's not what God's in the business of revealing. It

918
00:47:38,160 --> 00:47:40,480
Speaker 2: is interesting bathers on relation in the spirit.

919
00:47:41,000 --> 00:47:43,800
Speaker 1: It's so fat like triplets gets the try. They share

920
00:47:43,840 --> 00:47:48,879
Speaker 1: one family name, they share common blood, right, but can

921
00:47:48,920 --> 00:47:51,640
Speaker 1: you sever some of those things and divorce the family.

922
00:47:51,800 --> 00:47:55,040
Speaker 1: We don't need to take this illustration too much further

923
00:47:55,120 --> 00:47:55,400
Speaker 1: down there.

924
00:47:55,520 --> 00:47:57,840
Speaker 2: Yeah. I don't want to be your anti trinity guy, obviously,

925
00:47:57,880 --> 00:48:02,319
Speaker 2: but threeeness is not the point, m right. That's when

926
00:48:02,360 --> 00:48:03,960
Speaker 2: you hear the doctor the trainy from the outside and think, like,

927
00:48:04,040 --> 00:48:07,280
Speaker 2: Christians are weird. They're Monotheists, but they're really obsessed with three.

928
00:48:08,560 --> 00:48:11,160
Speaker 2: It's hard to communicate this briefly, but we're not actually

929
00:48:11,160 --> 00:48:14,279
Speaker 2: obsessed with three. We're obsessed with the Father and the

930
00:48:14,320 --> 00:48:16,759
Speaker 2: Son and the Holy Spirit. Now I'm well aware that

931
00:48:16,800 --> 00:48:21,000
Speaker 2: I'm counting to three. I can count. I know how

932
00:48:21,040 --> 00:48:22,680
Speaker 2: many we'll teach math, but you got to know how

933
00:48:22,680 --> 00:48:24,239
Speaker 2: many I just named. And I know I'd like to

934
00:48:24,239 --> 00:48:26,960
Speaker 2: call them persons because I can't just keep repeating the

935
00:48:26,960 --> 00:48:31,319
Speaker 2: dominical phrase father and son and Holy Spirit. But the

936
00:48:31,360 --> 00:48:34,719
Speaker 2: thing we're actually about is those three in their relations,

937
00:48:35,560 --> 00:48:38,319
Speaker 2: not threeeness in the abstract, and not just distinction in

938
00:48:38,360 --> 00:48:39,480
Speaker 2: the abstract.

939
00:48:39,400 --> 00:48:42,799
Speaker 1: Not distinction in the abstract. Okay, good stuff, all right, friends?

940
00:48:42,840 --> 00:48:45,920
Speaker 1: If you have questions here lodom, you know, here's the industry.

941
00:48:46,600 --> 00:48:49,440
Speaker 1: Somebody just throw out there, They said, what is the

942
00:48:49,440 --> 00:48:54,560
Speaker 1: most common misunderstanding of the Trinity today? Do you have

943
00:48:54,600 --> 00:48:57,000
Speaker 1: any sense of what you think are some of the

944
00:48:57,000 --> 00:48:59,520
Speaker 1: most common? And I guess we could say those outside

945
00:48:59,600 --> 00:49:05,320
Speaker 1: of the like if I said Muslims, what's their most common?

946
00:49:05,719 --> 00:49:09,600
Speaker 1: If I said Latter day Saints, if I said atheists, Yeah,

947
00:49:09,680 --> 00:49:13,040
Speaker 1: that might be different than the most common misinterpretation. And

948
00:49:13,080 --> 00:49:15,000
Speaker 1: there's a lot. I just don't want to pick on

949
00:49:15,080 --> 00:49:18,280
Speaker 1: those outside. There's a whole lot within the church itself.

950
00:49:18,960 --> 00:49:20,480
Speaker 1: Do you have a sense of what the most common

951
00:49:20,480 --> 00:49:24,080
Speaker 1: misunderstanding is from inside or outside? Or what do you

952
00:49:24,239 --> 00:49:26,120
Speaker 1: hear the most Given that you teach and write on this.

953
00:49:26,640 --> 00:49:30,440
Speaker 2: Yeah, like from the inside. If you grow up in

954
00:49:30,480 --> 00:49:32,840
Speaker 2: the church and are taught the doctrine of the Trinity

955
00:49:32,880 --> 00:49:37,360
Speaker 2: and you're reading the Bible, there can be a tendency

956
00:49:37,400 --> 00:49:39,600
Speaker 2: to sort of back and forth between the one and

957
00:49:39,680 --> 00:49:42,000
Speaker 2: the three because you can't quite capture it all. So

958
00:49:42,320 --> 00:49:45,200
Speaker 2: the heretical versions of emphasizing one at the cost of

959
00:49:45,280 --> 00:49:48,960
Speaker 2: three would be modalism. And that would be someone believes

960
00:49:48,960 --> 00:49:50,959
Speaker 2: in God and then they say, well, and Jesus is God,

961
00:49:51,360 --> 00:49:54,560
Speaker 2: and so I guess, like, sometimes God is the Father

962
00:49:54,640 --> 00:49:57,400
Speaker 2: and sometimes he's the Son. And you know, I teach

963
00:49:57,520 --> 00:50:01,000
Speaker 2: college students who are the wits about him a little

964
00:50:01,000 --> 00:50:03,399
Speaker 2: bit more. But but I also teach I also teach

965
00:50:03,440 --> 00:50:05,160
Speaker 2: the elementary school kids at church. And you know, you

966
00:50:05,239 --> 00:50:07,799
Speaker 2: got a five minute lesson with the first through the

967
00:50:07,800 --> 00:50:11,880
Speaker 2: fifth graders, and you got to say something they can understand.

968
00:50:11,960 --> 00:50:14,560
Speaker 2: But if they sort of think something kind of modalistic,

969
00:50:14,600 --> 00:50:17,239
Speaker 2: and I realize if I socratically cross examined them, I

970
00:50:17,280 --> 00:50:21,520
Speaker 2: could get them to commit rank modalistic heresy. Now I'm

971
00:50:21,520 --> 00:50:24,480
Speaker 2: not gonna do that. I'm gonna come at this questioning

972
00:50:24,680 --> 00:50:27,319
Speaker 2: enterprise from another direction. But I do think that's one

973
00:50:27,320 --> 00:50:29,920
Speaker 2: of the problems. And that's so if someone's if a

974
00:50:29,960 --> 00:50:33,359
Speaker 2: good evangelical Christian reading the Bible going to church is

975
00:50:33,520 --> 00:50:36,800
Speaker 2: super convinced of the deity of Christ but hasn't reflected

976
00:50:36,800 --> 00:50:39,840
Speaker 2: on how that all goes together, there will tend towards

977
00:50:39,880 --> 00:50:43,319
Speaker 2: modalism because they're just so sure Jesus is God. They

978
00:50:43,360 --> 00:50:45,720
Speaker 2: don't yet have a developed doctrine of God the Father.

979
00:50:46,440 --> 00:50:48,640
Speaker 2: They're kind of letting the Son do all the work

980
00:50:49,000 --> 00:50:51,279
Speaker 2: that biblically you should think about the Father when you

981
00:50:51,320 --> 00:50:53,919
Speaker 2: think of does that makes sense? Sometimes you ho someone

982
00:50:53,960 --> 00:50:55,839
Speaker 2: say the Gospel like Jesus loved us so much he

983
00:50:55,880 --> 00:50:58,040
Speaker 2: came to earth, died for us, and lives inside of us,

984
00:50:58,040 --> 00:51:01,200
Speaker 2: And I want to think, so that's true, but are

985
00:51:01,200 --> 00:51:03,960
Speaker 2: you trying to avoid the Father and the Spirit, Because

986
00:51:04,760 --> 00:51:06,600
Speaker 2: the full way to say that would be God so

987
00:51:06,760 --> 00:51:08,799
Speaker 2: loved the world that he sent his son, who died,

988
00:51:08,880 --> 00:51:11,600
Speaker 2: and sent the Holy Spirit to live within us. That's

989
00:51:11,600 --> 00:51:14,280
Speaker 2: the full We're kind of not disagreeing about the substance

990
00:51:14,320 --> 00:51:17,120
Speaker 2: of the point, but so that's kind of an implicit

991
00:51:17,200 --> 00:51:21,359
Speaker 2: modalism to reassign everything about salvation to the Son who

992
00:51:21,400 --> 00:51:22,840
Speaker 2: you're sure is God.

993
00:51:22,680 --> 00:51:26,680
Speaker 1: Which probably is more of an inter Christian thing to do.

994
00:51:26,920 --> 00:51:30,120
Speaker 1: I pray to Jesus and i'm Jesus comes into my heart,

995
00:51:30,239 --> 00:51:31,840
Speaker 1: and Jesus is the one who came and died in

996
00:51:31,880 --> 00:51:35,839
Speaker 1: the cross, because we're Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. That's probably more

997
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,520
Speaker 1: of a mistake that evangelicals make and don't have a

998
00:51:38,600 --> 00:51:40,680
Speaker 1: robust Holy Spirit. You've written a book on that, by

999
00:51:40,680 --> 00:51:42,960
Speaker 1: the way, Robust Fear the Father.

1000
00:51:43,560 --> 00:51:45,040
Speaker 2: So I think none of the sentences you just said

1001
00:51:45,040 --> 00:51:46,360
Speaker 2: are true. I wasn't track on all of them, but

1002
00:51:46,400 --> 00:51:48,839
Speaker 2: I think Jesus does all the things you're talking about,

1003
00:51:48,960 --> 00:51:51,640
Speaker 2: but not to the exclusion of the Father in spirit.

1004
00:51:51,719 --> 00:51:54,920
Speaker 2: We could talk about why it's more directly appropriate to

1005
00:51:54,920 --> 00:51:57,120
Speaker 2: talk about the Spirit in dwelling us, why the Bible

1006
00:51:57,160 --> 00:51:59,840
Speaker 2: talks about that more than the few times that it

1007
00:51:59,840 --> 00:52:02,520
Speaker 2: does affirm that Christ lives on us.

1008
00:52:03,080 --> 00:52:07,120
Speaker 1: So something Christ having a body and ascending, sends the

1009
00:52:07,120 --> 00:52:11,080
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit. So would you say Christ lives in us

1010
00:52:11,800 --> 00:52:14,759
Speaker 1: through the Holy Spirit? Yes, okay, so that that that's

1011
00:52:14,760 --> 00:52:17,560
Speaker 1: where the language because obviously his body is not inside

1012
00:52:17,560 --> 00:52:20,520
Speaker 1: of us, but he does live in us. It's because

1013
00:52:20,960 --> 00:52:25,040
Speaker 1: the Spirit and the Son are one, so that the

1014
00:52:25,120 --> 00:52:27,200
Speaker 1: spirit is inside of us. There's a sense you could

1015
00:52:27,239 --> 00:52:29,879
Speaker 1: say that Christ is inside of us, but there's still

1016
00:52:29,960 --> 00:52:33,279
Speaker 1: a distinction in their roles. And okay, all right, So

1017
00:52:34,120 --> 00:52:37,279
Speaker 1: this came up a few times and the comments and

1018
00:52:37,280 --> 00:52:39,080
Speaker 1: here's what they was sent in earlier. It says, and

1019
00:52:39,120 --> 00:52:41,200
Speaker 1: there's a few questions we could you can unpack this

1020
00:52:41,280 --> 00:52:43,080
Speaker 1: as you want to. It says, can you define the

1021
00:52:43,120 --> 00:52:48,000
Speaker 1: word God in the context of the Trinity? What does

1022
00:52:48,040 --> 00:52:52,120
Speaker 1: it mean? What does it not mean? It's like, when

1023
00:52:52,160 --> 00:52:55,719
Speaker 1: we think of well, God exists, are we thinking of

1024
00:52:55,800 --> 00:52:56,680
Speaker 1: the whole Trinity?

1025
00:52:56,800 --> 00:52:57,200
Speaker 2: Is God?

1026
00:52:57,560 --> 00:53:00,400
Speaker 1: Are we saying the Father exists? We're saying the Son exists,

1027
00:53:00,400 --> 00:53:03,160
Speaker 1: the Holy Spirit exists. And what would that mean for

1028
00:53:03,280 --> 00:53:05,759
Speaker 1: like praying to God? Yeah?

1029
00:53:05,840 --> 00:53:08,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I like the specificity of the question, can

1030
00:53:08,560 --> 00:53:11,480
Speaker 2: you define the word God in the context of the

1031
00:53:11,480 --> 00:53:15,120
Speaker 2: Doctor of the Trinity, because that's that's one particular context.

1032
00:53:15,160 --> 00:53:17,000
Speaker 2: You know, we got that word from the Bible, and

1033
00:53:17,040 --> 00:53:20,640
Speaker 2: in the Bible, the word God means a lot of things. Right,

1034
00:53:20,880 --> 00:53:23,880
Speaker 2: God is the God of gods. Well, that's the same word.

1035
00:53:24,280 --> 00:53:27,640
Speaker 2: So those are very different meanings of God. Right, Okay.

1036
00:53:28,320 --> 00:53:29,960
Speaker 2: The word they ask God is applied to the Son

1037
00:53:30,000 --> 00:53:32,080
Speaker 2: in the New Testament, but it primarily picks out the

1038
00:53:32,080 --> 00:53:36,879
Speaker 2: Father by appropriation. But in the doctrine of the Trinity,

1039
00:53:37,040 --> 00:53:39,200
Speaker 2: that specificity in the question is, oh, yeah, we're gonna

1040
00:53:39,200 --> 00:53:42,320
Speaker 2: want to use the word God to specify the divine essence,

1041
00:53:45,040 --> 00:53:47,320
Speaker 2: like we mean, we mean it's it's.

1042
00:53:47,920 --> 00:53:51,520
Speaker 1: The divine nature. So it's not it's I use.

1043
00:53:51,480 --> 00:53:54,239
Speaker 2: Nature, essence, and substance interchangeably. You might have a philosophical

1044
00:53:54,280 --> 00:53:56,160
Speaker 2: reason to do otherwise, but I don't. I lump them.

1045
00:53:56,560 --> 00:54:02,080
Speaker 1: But that's not personal. Essence, nature, substance is not personal

1046
00:54:02,120 --> 00:54:05,360
Speaker 1: by its very nature. And so when you're saying God,

1047
00:54:05,400 --> 00:54:10,359
Speaker 1: you're referring to the divine essence, the divine nature, the substance,

1048
00:54:10,800 --> 00:54:14,160
Speaker 1: and that essence, for lack of a better word, exists

1049
00:54:14,160 --> 00:54:21,680
Speaker 1: in infuses. Yeah, three centers of consciousness, three persons.

1050
00:54:21,719 --> 00:54:24,520
Speaker 2: It's a mental abstraction where I talk about only the

1051
00:54:24,520 --> 00:54:29,080
Speaker 2: divine essence without specifying the person. Now, the divine essence

1052
00:54:29,120 --> 00:54:33,279
Speaker 2: does not exist impersonally. There's no such thing God as

1053
00:54:33,280 --> 00:54:36,640
Speaker 2: the impersonal divine essence of the Trinity. It is the

1054
00:54:37,000 --> 00:54:38,960
Speaker 2: Father is the essence, the Son is the essence, the

1055
00:54:39,000 --> 00:54:40,000
Speaker 2: Spirit is the essence.

1056
00:54:40,719 --> 00:54:44,200
Speaker 1: There's the Yeah, Okay, so if I asked you who

1057
00:54:44,280 --> 00:54:47,440
Speaker 1: is God or what is God? You'd explain that differently

1058
00:54:47,480 --> 00:54:49,640
Speaker 1: if he was not phrased, what do we mean by

1059
00:54:49,680 --> 00:54:52,120
Speaker 1: God in the context of the Trinity?

1060
00:54:52,640 --> 00:54:55,040
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think it's important to acknowledge it. In

1061
00:54:55,080 --> 00:54:57,800
Speaker 2: the New Testament, the word God is mostly going to

1062
00:54:57,840 --> 00:55:00,960
Speaker 2: be picking out the first person of the Trinity by appropriation.

1063
00:55:01,360 --> 00:55:03,200
Speaker 1: So do you have moments Fred Jill like I got

1064
00:55:03,239 --> 00:55:05,759
Speaker 1: it and then it slips away? Because sometimes I feel

1065
00:55:05,800 --> 00:55:07,799
Speaker 1: that with a trade and I'm like, okay, it makes sense,

1066
00:55:07,840 --> 00:55:09,840
Speaker 1: and then I circle back. I'm like, Okay, wait a minute,

1067
00:55:10,239 --> 00:55:12,080
Speaker 1: I got to think about this a little bit more,

1068
00:55:12,200 --> 00:55:14,320
Speaker 1: and I've made progress, Like, and I get it. I

1069
00:55:14,360 --> 00:55:16,759
Speaker 1: don't think it's contradictory. I really don't. When we look

1070
00:55:16,760 --> 00:55:19,160
Speaker 1: at what the scripture teaches. The moment I think I

1071
00:55:19,239 --> 00:55:21,960
Speaker 1: get it, then like slips away? Is that just me?

1072
00:55:22,239 --> 00:55:24,640
Speaker 1: Or is tell me how you think of this because

1073
00:55:24,640 --> 00:55:26,480
Speaker 1: you've been studying thing about this a long time.

1074
00:55:27,120 --> 00:55:29,760
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a weird sentence to say I understand the Trinity.

1075
00:55:29,760 --> 00:55:31,680
Speaker 2: But the thing is it's a doctrine, and a doctrine

1076
00:55:31,719 --> 00:55:34,799
Speaker 2: is something taught, and that means that it must be

1077
00:55:34,880 --> 00:55:38,239
Speaker 2: possible to know what is being claimed and pass it

1078
00:55:38,280 --> 00:55:41,120
Speaker 2: on to the next generation. You know, the secret things

1079
00:55:41,160 --> 00:55:44,120
Speaker 2: belong to God, but the secret things of the God

1080
00:55:44,200 --> 00:55:46,800
Speaker 2: belong to the Lord. But the things revealed belong to

1081
00:55:46,880 --> 00:55:50,839
Speaker 2: us and to our children. Right, it's Deuteronomy twenty five

1082
00:55:50,880 --> 00:55:52,480
Speaker 2: twenty five? Or is it Leviticus?

1083
00:55:52,560 --> 00:55:52,680
Speaker 1: Ah?

1084
00:55:52,719 --> 00:55:55,840
Speaker 2: I always miss which book of Moses it is. So

1085
00:55:56,160 --> 00:55:57,600
Speaker 2: that means that there are secret things of God that

1086
00:55:57,640 --> 00:55:59,319
Speaker 2: we can't talk about because they are not made known

1087
00:55:59,320 --> 00:56:01,959
Speaker 2: to us. They're his. But if you make something known,

1088
00:56:02,160 --> 00:56:05,960
Speaker 2: then it's a doctrine, and the doctrine is understandable. Now,

1089
00:56:06,000 --> 00:56:11,279
Speaker 2: God is incomprehensible and mysterious and outstrips our understanding. But

1090
00:56:11,400 --> 00:56:15,040
Speaker 2: the doctrine has to be actually knowable and understandable and teachable.

1091
00:56:15,800 --> 00:56:19,560
Speaker 1: That's a really helpful distinction. So then tell me what

1092
00:56:19,600 --> 00:56:22,920
Speaker 1: the doctrine is. I did a little search here. I

1093
00:56:23,040 --> 00:56:26,279
Speaker 1: use Logo Bible software almost every day. I have two

1094
00:56:26,320 --> 00:56:29,279
Speaker 1: sponsors for the channel. One is Talbot and Biola, and

1095
00:56:29,320 --> 00:56:32,480
Speaker 1: then second Logos. I've used it for thirty years, so

1096
00:56:32,520 --> 00:56:34,719
Speaker 1: I just did a search. They have this feature where

1097
00:56:34,719 --> 00:56:38,040
Speaker 1: you can actually plug in and ask AI, but it

1098
00:56:38,160 --> 00:56:40,960
Speaker 1: limits it to my resources. I'm not pulling in stuff

1099
00:56:41,000 --> 00:56:43,960
Speaker 1: from online. Whatever I said, what is the Trinity says

1100
00:56:43,960 --> 00:56:48,680
Speaker 1: the Trinity represents the central affirmation of Christian theology, one

1101
00:56:48,719 --> 00:56:54,000
Speaker 1: God existing simultaneously as three distinct persons, Father, Son, and

1102
00:56:54,040 --> 00:56:59,560
Speaker 1: Holy Spirit sharing a single divine essence. Now, as far

1103
00:56:59,600 --> 00:57:03,200
Speaker 1: as a ethinition, does that strike you as pretty solid?

1104
00:57:03,600 --> 00:57:07,920
Speaker 2: Yeah? It does. I want to go on, obviously to

1105
00:57:08,040 --> 00:57:13,120
Speaker 2: say things about the relations, you know, Okay, that that

1106
00:57:13,239 --> 00:57:16,479
Speaker 2: reference to the divine essence is kind of a tip

1107
00:57:16,520 --> 00:57:18,959
Speaker 2: of the hat to say, we're kind of thinking about

1108
00:57:18,960 --> 00:57:21,680
Speaker 2: the Athenasian Creed here. If you're read the Athenasian Creed,

1109
00:57:21,720 --> 00:57:24,840
Speaker 2: you can kind of diagram it as there's the Father

1110
00:57:24,960 --> 00:57:27,320
Speaker 2: is almighty, the Son is almighty, and the Spirit is almighty.

1111
00:57:27,360 --> 00:57:30,520
Speaker 2: But there aren't three almighties. There's one almighty. You know.

1112
00:57:30,800 --> 00:57:33,560
Speaker 2: It's it gives in that incantatory kind of way of talking. Okay,

1113
00:57:33,600 --> 00:57:35,800
Speaker 2: So there's the three to one dynamic that the Athenasian

1114
00:57:35,880 --> 00:57:39,680
Speaker 2: Creed really draws out. Really well, it's sort of background

1115
00:57:39,720 --> 00:57:42,600
Speaker 2: to the relation. I'm just gonna just keep hitting that, right.

1116
00:57:42,640 --> 00:57:44,640
Speaker 2: I want to know not just that there are three

1117
00:57:44,680 --> 00:57:47,600
Speaker 2: distinct persons, but I want to know their relation. That

1118
00:57:47,680 --> 00:57:49,840
Speaker 2: the Father and it's built into the traditionally to the

1119
00:57:49,840 --> 00:57:51,800
Speaker 2: father is father of the son, the son is son

1120
00:57:51,880 --> 00:57:52,440
Speaker 2: of the Father.

1121
00:57:53,280 --> 00:57:54,880
Speaker 1: Okay, so I'm gonna say this again. I want to

1122
00:57:54,920 --> 00:57:57,840
Speaker 1: make this distinction, he said, is important there understanding the

1123
00:57:57,880 --> 00:58:02,200
Speaker 1: doctrine and understanding God God. So the doctrine has certain

1124
00:58:02,280 --> 00:58:05,600
Speaker 1: parameters about how God has revealed himself to us that

1125
00:58:05,680 --> 00:58:10,320
Speaker 1: we can sufficiently understand, but we won't and we can

1126
00:58:10,360 --> 00:58:14,440
Speaker 1: pass it on to further generations. But the God behind

1127
00:58:14,720 --> 00:58:18,040
Speaker 1: that doctrine is a whole different question. We can grow

1128
00:58:18,080 --> 00:58:20,240
Speaker 1: in that understanding. I just got it.

1129
00:58:20,360 --> 00:58:22,920
Speaker 2: You could say, I know God. I understand the doctrine

1130
00:58:22,960 --> 00:58:27,680
Speaker 2: of the Trinity, so I acknowledge by acquaintance of the

1131
00:58:27,720 --> 00:58:28,240
Speaker 2: one who.

1132
00:58:28,120 --> 00:58:31,280
Speaker 1: Is God, So I know God personally. I mean, this

1133
00:58:31,320 --> 00:58:35,560
Speaker 1: is John seventeen that you may know the one true

1134
00:58:35,560 --> 00:58:37,640
Speaker 1: God are in Act seventeen. The whole point is this

1135
00:58:37,680 --> 00:58:39,960
Speaker 1: is the unknown God. And Paul's like, no, he's drawn

1136
00:58:40,040 --> 00:58:42,720
Speaker 1: near to you. You can know this God. So we

1137
00:58:42,760 --> 00:58:46,440
Speaker 1: can know God by acquaintance, we can know God personally,

1138
00:58:47,240 --> 00:58:51,120
Speaker 1: we can understand the doctrine of the Trinity. That's how

1139
00:58:51,160 --> 00:58:51,720
Speaker 1: you frame it.

1140
00:58:51,800 --> 00:58:53,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I have a lot of sympathy for outsiders

1141
00:58:53,840 --> 00:58:56,120
Speaker 2: who hear that, like, apparently Christians each three is one

1142
00:58:56,160 --> 00:58:59,120
Speaker 2: and one is three. You know that way of putting

1143
00:58:59,120 --> 00:59:01,040
Speaker 2: You think, yeah, it just sounds like a contradiction to me.

1144
00:59:01,120 --> 00:59:03,560
Speaker 2: It's and you can get the impression that Christians are saying,

1145
00:59:04,120 --> 00:59:06,840
Speaker 2: you know, God's a square circle and we don't understand it.

1146
00:59:06,920 --> 00:59:08,960
Speaker 2: But if you don't believe it, you will go to hell.

1147
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:15,360
Speaker 2: That's just how it is. Square circle. Well, a square

1148
00:59:15,360 --> 00:59:18,800
Speaker 2: circle is not a coherent concept. I can't teach that

1149
00:59:18,840 --> 00:59:21,160
Speaker 2: God is a square circle and say yeah, he exceeds

1150
00:59:21,200 --> 00:59:24,440
Speaker 2: our understanding. No, your sentence is bad. You you just

1151
00:59:24,440 --> 00:59:26,280
Speaker 2: put the wrong adjective in front of the wrong noun.

1152
00:59:26,360 --> 00:59:29,800
Speaker 2: They actually, you cannot form a concept of what even

1153
00:59:29,880 --> 00:59:33,520
Speaker 2: is being claimed by a circle that has four corners

1154
00:59:34,280 --> 00:59:36,280
Speaker 2: or a square where every point on the circumference is

1155
00:59:36,320 --> 00:59:39,160
Speaker 2: equidistant from the center. That's not that's just a trick

1156
00:59:39,200 --> 00:59:42,440
Speaker 2: you're doing with words, right. That's just rearranging adjectives and

1157
00:59:42,480 --> 00:59:46,040
Speaker 2: nouns that are incompatible. It's like saying, you know, chocolate up.

1158
00:59:46,960 --> 00:59:50,560
Speaker 1: Friends, make a comment first off, if is helpful, give

1159
00:59:50,600 --> 00:59:52,400
Speaker 1: us a like, give his thumbs up. Let us know

1160
00:59:52,440 --> 00:59:56,080
Speaker 1: if Talbot Tuesdays is helpful. I'm going to take some

1161
00:59:56,160 --> 00:59:58,160
Speaker 1: of the summer off, but we're willing to come back

1162
00:59:58,160 --> 00:59:59,720
Speaker 1: in the fall. If you want me to keep bringing

1163
00:59:59,800 --> 01:00:02,520
Speaker 1: on talbot professors to talk about all this kind of stuff.

1164
01:00:03,040 --> 01:00:05,240
Speaker 1: I would love to know. I'm gonna come back and

1165
01:00:05,240 --> 01:00:08,200
Speaker 1: look at these comments. What your big takeaway is one

1166
01:00:08,200 --> 01:00:10,479
Speaker 1: of my takeaways Fred, as you studied this your whole life,

1167
01:00:10,480 --> 01:00:15,160
Speaker 1: you have reminded me to be charitable to people and

1168
01:00:15,200 --> 01:00:19,280
Speaker 1: their interpretations of the Trinity, because this is difficult. I

1169
01:00:19,320 --> 01:00:21,040
Speaker 1: think two or three times you're like, you know what,

1170
01:00:21,080 --> 01:00:23,680
Speaker 1: here's a charitable way of making sense of this passage.

1171
01:00:24,160 --> 01:00:27,440
Speaker 1: And if you've been told this about the Trinity, of

1172
01:00:27,520 --> 01:00:31,520
Speaker 1: course you're going to believe this. So that encourages me

1173
01:00:31,560 --> 01:00:33,920
Speaker 1: when I hear some silly thing about the Trinity, rather

1174
01:00:33,920 --> 01:00:35,960
Speaker 1: than get angry as somebody or just think what are

1175
01:00:36,000 --> 01:00:37,440
Speaker 1: you doing and try to correct them, and just think,

1176
01:00:37,440 --> 01:00:40,439
Speaker 1: I wonder where that person got that idea, And there's

1177
01:00:40,480 --> 01:00:43,480
Speaker 1: a decent chance that came from a well meaning Christian.

1178
01:00:43,680 --> 01:00:46,560
Speaker 1: There's a decent chance that came from the church, And

1179
01:00:46,600 --> 01:00:50,120
Speaker 1: so we got to really fix things inside first, and

1180
01:00:50,200 --> 01:00:52,960
Speaker 1: maybe even asking a question, say you know, maybe you

1181
01:00:52,960 --> 01:00:56,560
Speaker 1: could tell me where did you get the idea that

1182
01:00:56,280 --> 01:01:00,280
Speaker 1: that's what the doctrine of the Trinity is. Would you

1183
01:01:00,360 --> 01:01:03,440
Speaker 1: be open to me explaining what I think the doctrine is.

1184
01:01:03,520 --> 01:01:06,680
Speaker 1: You can know God, you can understand the doctrine and

1185
01:01:06,760 --> 01:01:10,000
Speaker 1: going back to what scripture says. So I love it.

1186
01:01:10,080 --> 01:01:13,160
Speaker 1: This has been so helpful. I could literally keep going

1187
01:01:13,200 --> 01:01:15,800
Speaker 1: forever on this fread. This is really helpful. We got

1188
01:01:15,800 --> 01:01:18,880
Speaker 1: a bunch of questions here and there's some that we

1189
01:01:18,920 --> 01:01:21,000
Speaker 1: obviously missed. But again, friends, let us know if Talbot

1190
01:01:21,040 --> 01:01:24,280
Speaker 1: Tuesdays are helpful. We've got some world class faculty here

1191
01:01:24,280 --> 01:01:29,400
Speaker 1: at Tabaschool Theology Bio University in theology and philosophy. We've

1192
01:01:29,440 --> 01:01:32,120
Speaker 1: been doing the Latin science the last two or three months.

1193
01:01:32,160 --> 01:01:34,080
Speaker 1: If you're like, you know what these Tuesdays bringing on

1194
01:01:34,160 --> 01:01:37,160
Speaker 1: faculty like this is helpful, make a comment, give a

1195
01:01:37,200 --> 01:01:39,720
Speaker 1: thumbs up, shoot me an email, and we'll keep doing

1196
01:01:39,720 --> 01:01:42,240
Speaker 1: this again in the fall. We'd love to have you

1197
01:01:42,240 --> 01:01:45,280
Speaker 1: here in our apologetics program. We will look at in

1198
01:01:45,320 --> 01:01:48,120
Speaker 1: part of our apologists program. We have Bible, we have theology,

1199
01:01:48,720 --> 01:01:51,160
Speaker 1: and we have apologetics. We've kind of done all of

1200
01:01:51,200 --> 01:01:54,640
Speaker 1: that in this conversation. We've kind of blended it together,

1201
01:01:55,120 --> 01:01:56,840
Speaker 1: and so we'd love to have you study with us.

1202
01:01:58,200 --> 01:02:00,480
Speaker 1: And information on that is below.

1203
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:00,880
Speaker 2: Fred.

1204
01:02:00,880 --> 01:02:02,560
Speaker 1: Again, you have a book on the Holy Spirit. You

1205
01:02:02,600 --> 01:02:05,480
Speaker 1: and I had a full conversation about that earlier. Your

1206
01:02:05,480 --> 01:02:08,680
Speaker 1: big book is called The Triune God. That's the big

1207
01:02:08,720 --> 01:02:11,880
Speaker 1: one with Zonervin tell us one more Time, the popular

1208
01:02:11,880 --> 01:02:14,120
Speaker 1: love book for somebody says, Okay, I want to dive

1209
01:02:14,120 --> 01:02:17,120
Speaker 1: into this. Read a book that'll help me. Title one

1210
01:02:17,160 --> 01:02:17,840
Speaker 1: more Time, The.

1211
01:02:17,760 --> 01:02:20,200
Speaker 2: Deep Things of God, How the Trinity changes everything?

1212
01:02:20,600 --> 01:02:24,000
Speaker 1: The Deep Things of God, How the Trinity changes everything.

1213
01:02:24,360 --> 01:02:26,480
Speaker 1: I like that, all right? Friends. Also, let us know

1214
01:02:26,520 --> 01:02:28,600
Speaker 1: if you want me to revisit the Trinity again, or

1215
01:02:28,600 --> 01:02:31,479
Speaker 1: there's some questions or topics or angles here that would

1216
01:02:31,480 --> 01:02:34,800
Speaker 1: be helpful, and we'll do it. Fred. This is a

1217
01:02:34,800 --> 01:02:38,520
Speaker 1: ton of fun, or maybe I should say Fredfredfred is

1218
01:02:38,560 --> 01:02:41,640
Speaker 1: a ton of fun. Thanks for coming on in summer.

1219
01:02:42,520 --> 01:02:43,320
Speaker 1: Really enjoyed this.

1220
01:02:43,480 --> 01:02:44,600
Speaker 2: Thanks a lot. Go to see you Sean.

1221
01:02:44,920 --> 01:02:47,640
Speaker 1: Hey, friends, if you enjoyed this show, please hit that

1222
01:02:47,720 --> 01:02:50,640
Speaker 1: fall button on your podcast app. Most of you tuning

1223
01:02:50,720 --> 01:02:53,040
Speaker 1: in haven't done this yet, and it makes a huge

1224
01:02:53,080 --> 01:02:55,840
Speaker 1: difference in helping us reach and equip more people and

1225
01:02:55,840 --> 01:03:00,320
Speaker 1: build community. And please consider leaving a podcast review. Every

1226
01:03:00,480 --> 01:03:03,600
Speaker 1: review helps. Thanks for listening to The Sean McDowell Show,

1227
01:03:03,720 --> 01:03:07,560
Speaker 1: brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University,

1228
01:03:07,600 --> 01:03:10,920
Speaker 1: where we have on campus and online programs, and apologetic

1229
01:03:10,960 --> 01:03:14,240
Speaker 1: spiritual formation, marriage and family, Bible, and so much more.

1230
01:03:14,320 --> 01:03:17,320
Speaker 1: We would love to train you to more effectively, live, teach,

1231
01:03:17,400 --> 01:03:20,240
Speaker 1: and defend the Christian faith today and we will see

1232
01:03:20,240 --> 01:03:22,120
Speaker 1: you when the next episode drops.