Trinity Sunday

I don't want to talk about theology. Theology is much too head-level thinking. It is twice removed from experiences of God. It is often a way of explaining something that we really don't know. Take the theologies of Holy Communion. We could talk forever about what the correct theology is. We could further split Christianity into more smaller groups just by doing so. Remember, personal experience is first; telling someone else about your experience is second; explaining the experience is third.

As far as I'm concerned getting back to the original experience of the Trinity is probably much easier than with some theological doctrines. Yes, the Trinity is a doctrine. It is only peripherally biblical. It is an explanation of something that we can't explain. We can only experience it.

God the Father,
God the Son,
God the Holy Spirit.

Any way you try to describe what that means will make you a heretic to someone.

In short, to me, it is simply the three ways that God had been experienced by God's people. There was no problem with any of this until Jesus came along. He really threw things into a theological uproar. How could he be God when God was God. Then this Holy Spirit. Wait, God is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God? I can't wrap my human mind around that.

Which is good because we can look at the many ways we have gotten into trouble when we have tried to wrap our human minds around something with human logic and reason. Human logic and reason don't work. We're talking about God here. We're not talking about something we could understand. John Chrysostom (345-407) said it well in a quote I read recently.

A comprehended God is no God.

So I'm not comfortable talking about theology in times like this. God is Father- Creator, yes, but more than that. Father is a relationship word. As is Son- God the Son. These aren't cold theological constructs. These are words we understand if only poorly in some families and better in others. In the end for me faith is always about relationships more than it is about correct theology. None of us will ever have a truly correct theology. So we might as well work at the relationships.

I Have Trouble With This

After last week's bridge disaster here in Minneapolis our famous local pastor John Piper was quoted around the blogosphere as having the following conversation. He was putting his 11-year old daughter to bed and part of the conversation went like this:

But you and I know that God did not do anything wrong. God always does what is wise. And you and I know that God could have held up that bridge with one hand.” Talitha said, “With his pinky.” “Yes,” I said, “with his pinky. Which means that God had a purpose for not holding up that bridge, knowing all that would happen, and he is infinitely wise in all that he wills.”

Talitha said, “Maybe he let it fall because he wanted all the people of Minneapolis to fear him.” “Yes, Talitha,” I said, “I am sure that is one of the reasons God let the bridge fall.”
--Desiring God Blog

While I realize that my poor human persepctive is both narrow and biased, I find such a view of God not one I would want to believe in or follow. It shows a God who does- or doesn't do things as punishment, as a way of getting people's attention, as lack of caring or passion when it comes to human suffering. That is not the God I see in the teachings of Jesus. It is not the God I have seen in many ways over my lifetime.

But somehow we have to give an explanation for something as awful as this. We have to come up with answers as to why God would let such things even happen in the first place.

It is not a new question. It has been around since the days of sitting around campfires and telling stories of God. Like the one about Job and losing it all in a bet between God and Satan. (Let's leave that theology aside for now. Please!) There are all these comforters who have all the answers and try to show Job the error of his ways. "You must have done something bad. Your children or your great-grandparents must have done something bad. God wants you to pay better attention and become a better person." Sound familiar?

At the end there is no resolution. God speaks to Job and says simply, "Don't ask. All is in my hands. Trust me."

That is NOT the same as saying God chose to let the bridge fall for some greater reason. That is NOT the same thing as saying that God uses death and destruction as a way of getting people's attention. That IS saying that no matter what happens, God is around and in control. What that means is far beyond anything that I can even begin to explain.

All I know is that at times like this God is very present. No questions asked.

One last comment from John Piper though. Beond the first question, there is always this as well.

I said, “You know, Talitha, that is true whether you die in a bridge collapse, or in a car accident, or from cancer, or terrorism, or old age. God always keeps you, even when you die. So you don’t need to be afraid, do you.” “No,” she shook her head. I leaned down and kissed her. “Good night. I love you.”

I think those are also God's exact words.

The Nature of Truth- What is Unorthodox
Christianity Today reported earlier this week on a brewing theological debate in the UK. It involves a speaker that was considered "unorthodox" in his views because he does not subscribe to the "orthodox" understanding of penal substitution.

Good old C.S.Lewis was probably far more aware than most of us when it comes to thinking about the different interpretations of atonement:

We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed. Any theories we build up as to how Christ's death did all this are, in my view, quite secondary: mere plans or diagrams to be left alone if they do not help us, and, even if they do help us, not to be confused with the thing itself.
--Wikipedia information about atonement. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Atonement".

When I became a Christian at age 15 I never knew there were any other ways of looking at what Jesus did. It was penal substitution. What I later found as interesting is that this is not the oldest or most basic understanding.

In Christian theology, various doctrines of atonement have been advanced in history, all of which give central place to the life and death of Jesus. The classical theory of atonement, widely accepted in the early Church, depicted Jesus as the divine victor in a cosmic struggle with the devil for rights over the human soul. In medieval Latin theology emphasis shifted from the divine to the human side of Jesus. The most widely held theory at this time, often called vicarious atonement, was first stated by St. Anselm in Why God Became Human (1197–98): only human beings can rightfully repay the debt which was incurred through their willful disobedience to God, although only God can make the infinite satisfaction necessary to repay it; therefore God must send the God-man, Jesus Christ, to satisfy both these conditions. Anselm's doctrine, slightly altered or elaborated, has become part of Roman Catholic theology and of that of many Protestant churches. In another theory of atonement emphasis is placed on God's unconditional mercy and on the gradual growth toward union with God as inspired by Christ's selfless example. This theory was given its standard form by Peter Abelard in the 12th cent. Here the juridical concept is replaced by an organic and social concept.
--Columbia Encyclopedia information about atonement The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/

When people claim that someone else isn't following the right, ancient, or proper understanding of things - i.e. being unorthodox - I guess the question sooner or later becomes - which orthodoxy? Somehow I think that God simply wants us to follow Jesus and love God. Theology is interesting sometimes.

But now, let's get back to reality- Jesus is Lord. I don't know what all the different theologies say about that- I just know it at this point. And for that I am glad that He doesn't give a theological essay exam at the Final Judgment.

I hope.