1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured EFS

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by McCree79, Sep 2, 2017.

Top Posters
Page 4 of 5
  1. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    10,544
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have not paid much attention to this doctrine or debate. To me it seemed like something of a semantic argument that some complementarians and egalitarians enjoy -- and at times at least provides fodder for some of one to call some of the other heretics.

    [Edited to add words left out of a sentence. Just noting this since I did so after McCree quoted me (below)]
     
    #61 rlvaughn, Sep 4, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  2. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, I don't think Grudem is attempting Trump the Nicene creed, but trying to add clarification of the person of The Son. Much like the Athanasian Creed did on defense agaisnt Sabellianism. Grudem positioning, while is being used in defense of complimentarism --- is also used in defense(and perhaps more importantly) agaisnt Modalism that plagues our churches. A lot of people will say 3 persons, 1 God(being). But ask them to describe the Trinity, they will give you a Modalistic definition. One of Wayne's concerns has been clearly identifying the persons of the God head from each other. Which we do a horrible job in the church at doing. Modalism plagues the SBC churches of Western Kentucky and Southern Illinois. I believe Modalism to be a much bigger issue than EFS. If we are unable to define the persons of the Trinity, that is a problem.

    Wayne also uses EFS to defend the immutability of the Son.

    I have posted this video before, but here is some of Grudem's motivations.

    Video: Wayne Grudem Responds to His Critics | LogosTalk





    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #62 McCree79, Sep 4, 2017
  3. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    .....you assessment is likley spot on:)

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #63 McCree79, Sep 4, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  4. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Can you expand on why you believe it would apply to being and not persons?

    *I also assume you are using the term economy in the sense of distribution of roles. Sorry I have misinterpreted.

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #64 McCree79, Sep 4, 2017
  5. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No heretics yet, but we might have to sing the Te Deum before too long.

    HankD
     
    #65 HankD, Sep 4, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Bro. James

    Bro. James Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,130
    Likes Received:
    59
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Jesus was I AM long before Nicea. There are some out here who do not subscribe to the so-called church councils. The religious world has been wrestling with who Jesus is ever since He told the Jews He is I AM that I AM. This statement got Him indicted on blasphemy charges--He makes Himself to be God. This is a pivotal point: If Jesus is not I AM, Lord God Jehovah, from Mt. Sinai, He is an imposter. It cannot be all of the above.

    Why do we keep trying to describe God to the nth degree? There is no way to describe Him short of: Holy, Holy, Holy. We have not a clue of what Holy might mean?

    Now what?

    Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

    Bro. James
     
    #66 Bro. James, Sep 4, 2017
  7. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Brother James He gave us His word and described Himself.

    Yes we will never even at eternity's end know "to the nth degree" what Holy, Holy, Holy means but we love to try. :) To His great glory of course, always and forever.

    HankD
     
    #67 HankD, Sep 4, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It seems to me that relationships within the Trinity are ontological; how the three persons function outside the Trinity are economic. Probably too simplistic, but that's how it seems to me.
     
    #68 rsr, Sep 4, 2017
  9. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, I'm in total agreement on that. I've often said it would shock most preachers to know how many functional Modalists there are in the pews.

    I just do not see the necessity of ESS as a tool to remedy that.
     
    #69 rsr, Sep 4, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I understand the submissiveness of the Son to be external to the Trinity only in that it expresses an eternal and internal truth - that the subjective functions within the Godhead (both in the act of creating and throughout redemptive history) reveal the eternal nature of God. In this way, you could say this subjection is ontological – but ONLY in terms of it being ontological to God (to the Godhead) and not to the nature of individual persons (Father, Son, and Spirit).

    I think the way this would be expressed is that eternal subordination is ontological to God as God is eternally triune. But when we speak of eternal subordination as an association within the Godhead as between persons of the Trinity, then we speak of the economy within the Trinity rather than ontological properties of each member.

    The term “Trinity” and “Godhead” implies a difference in roles, but not of nature. If we consider the Godhead to be eternal, rather than an expression of God through the dispensation of redemptive history, then I cannot help but see the functions that define the Trinity to be just as eternal.
     
    #70 JonC, Sep 4, 2017
  11. Bro. James

    Bro. James Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,130
    Likes Received:
    59
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It may also surprise some regarding the number of unregenerated on the rolls, as well as the staffs of these LLC's, aka: churches. Ecumenism and easy believism have filled the pews by the hands of wolves dressed like sheep.

    The Lord knows them that are His.

    Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

    Bro. James
     
    #71 Bro. James, Sep 4, 2017
  12. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not to worry brother

    Matthew 13
    41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
    42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
    43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

    HankD
     
    #72 HankD, Sep 4, 2017
  13. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    yes, but the issue seems to be whether that subordination was just during His Incarnation here, or else is to be eternal.
     
    #73 Yeshua1, Sep 5, 2017
  14. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    calvin limites that to while on earth, not eternally though!
     
    #74 Yeshua1, Sep 5, 2017
  15. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    For you perhaps. For others it is a matter of the Son could never be subordinate

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #75 McCree79, Sep 5, 2017
  16. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He was clearly that as per Philippians, but again, difference is was of a temp, nor eternal basis!
     
    #76 Yeshua1, Sep 5, 2017
  17. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I believe there is a close English word for the Son's relationship to the Father's will.

    Not subordinate or submissive but - compliant.

    HankD
     
    #77 HankD, Sep 5, 2017
  18. Rob_BW

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,324
    Likes Received:
    1,246
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yeesh, compliant sounds worse than subordinate, at least to my ears.

    Wittgenstein would love this thread. :)
     
    #78 Rob_BW, Sep 5, 2017
  19. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I like it better - to me it has a nuance of free will - to do or not to do the will of His father as His equal.
    :)
    HankD
     
    #79 HankD, Sep 5, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  20. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    20,512
    Likes Received:
    3,047
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Disagree, vehemently. Our Saviour was not trying to circumvent the cross:

    7 Who in the days of his flesh, having offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and having been heard for his godly fear, Heb 5

    He was heard. His supplications were answered. God saved Him from death. He didn't leave Him in the grave. He raised Him from the dead. Period.

    The whole premise that Christ was attempting to avoid the cross is seriously defect.
     
    #80 kyredneck, Sep 5, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 4 of 5
Loading...