I've had a few questions/thoughts since the Sam Storms conference on the Spirit. One question comes from Justin C's notes on the Friday night session (that I missed).
Here is JC's note on Storms' third point:
3. We quench the Spirit when we suppress or legislate the gifts He gives. Cessationism is quenching the Spirit. We need all of the gifts of the Spirit and not just a select few. (emphasis mine)
My questions concerning this are, Did he address the supposed gift of Apostleship? and if so, What did he say about its legitimacy for today?
Other questions I had were about his view of Jesus' "laying aside" of his divine attributes while on earth. I wasn't exactly comfortable with everything he said in that session. Did Jesus lay aside the divine character as well as his attributes? Does Storms' view open up the possibility of Jesus disobeying the Father? What are your thoughts about what Storms said concerning this?
Those are two areas where I had questions. Do you have any insight into them? Do you have any questions/comments of your own about the conference?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
No, I don't think Sam dealt with the gift of Apostleship. Although he did say that he views Eph. 4:11 as gifts given by the Spirit.
Here is a link to a talk by Bruce Ware about Jesus and the Spirit. I'm looking forward to seeing what he said:
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/ConferenceMessages/ByDate/2005/2145_Jesus_and_the_Spirit/
I also have some concerns with the second session.
Interestingly, I had far less concerns with the second session than the others. Dr. Storms emphasized that Christ was fully God even as He walked on the earth, but that his life on earth was lived without any use of His own divine powers. All that He did He accomplished through the Spirit. John Owen's works on the Spirit are a good resource for more on this.
As for whether it was possible for Jesus to sin, there is a sense in which the answer is yes, another in which the answer is no (I think Grudem's Systematic addresses this question). On earth, Jesus certainly had the capability of sinning. However, He did not have the inherited sinful nature that inclined Him to sin. I would suggest that His status was the same as that of pre-Fall Adam: sinless, but capable of sinning. If Christ did not have this capacity, I'm not sure His sinless life would have its salvific significance.
Also, while Dr. Storms did not address the gift of apostleship per se, he did say that he understood the apostle-prophet-evangelist-pastor-teacher list of Ephesians 4 as a list of gifts, not offices. However, if I remember correctly, I believe in his contribution to the 4 Views book he does join Grudem in affirming that this particular gift (apostleship) has ceased. If I recall rightly, I believe that Gaffin spent some time on this, pointing out that Storms and Grudem are at least cessationists at this point.
Since the Sabbath issue doesn't seem to be drawing much discussion, I may post the propositions of the cessationist and continuationist view here in the next day or so for us to consider.
I'm still wrestling with the second session for one main reason:
When I read the gospel of John, it seems clear to me that John is proving Christ's diety BY recording His miracles. You can know He is God because He does things only God can do.
For example, look at John 13:19. Jesus predicts Judas' betrayal and then says, "I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he."
Does he mean, "you will know that I am human dependent on the Spirit"? Or does he mean, "you will know that I am God"? Clearly, Jesus is saying only God can predict the future. I predict the future. Therefore, I am God.
This same argument would not be true of us. If, in dependence on the Holy Spirit, we are able to see and declare the future, we would not say that makes us God.
I don't have any problem saying that MOST of what Jesus did on earth was as a human dependent on the Spirit. I'm having trouble saying ALL of what Jesus did was as a human.
Any thoughts on this?
JC,
I had that same thought during the session. If you would have look at me, you would have seen me quickly flipping through the gospels.
Another example is at the end of John when he says that "these things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God..." (John 20:31)
"Primarily, the title 'Son of God' affirms Jesus' deity evidenced by His person and His work." (Dockery in the Holman Bible Dictionary)
In Grudem's "Bible Doctrine", it seems that he would disagree with Dr. Storms' interpretation of Phil.2 (see page 240).
jc and jim u -
I did not hear the Sat presentation but I heard his Fri comments about Sat morning. This is the view presented by John Owen in his volume on the Work of the Spirit. There are two points at which you are may be missing Owen's view (and I assume Storms' but I may be wrong not having heard his comments).
1) Every thing God does is Trinitarian involving the activity of all three persons and that it is not truly Christian to think of God apart from this distinctly Christian concept. If this is true then Christ did not do anything without the immediate involvement of the Father and Spirit. The idea of truly independent action on the part of one member of the Trinity is a problem since there is in fact one God. If you think about it I think you will see that your concerns are NOT really in conflict with this idea.
2) Christ was a true man on earth having laid aside his glory in the incarnation. He didn't cheat. You are a real man and he represented you perfectly in his manhood. His perfect life was the perfect life of a true man. When he learned math as a child he learned math - it was not a show or pretense.
I suggest you listen to the following lecture on Owen's position - it is quite informative about his thinking on precisely this issue.
http://mp3.sa-media.com/media/109051664/109051664.mp3
I would be interested to hear your comments after hearing this lecture.
Post a Comment