Thinking-Christianly

One of the most common objections to the concept of the Trinity is the argument that the idea is invalid because the word is not found in the Bible. This argument confuses two separate realities.

It is true that the English word Trinity [or any Greek or Hebrew equivalent] does not occur in the text of the Bible. But the presence or absence of the word does not automatically require that the concept of the tri-unity of God be rejected. There are other words we used to describe the revelation of God in scripture that are useful, but do not occur in the text of the Bible.

For example, we describe God as omnipotent, or all powerful. The word omnipotent is not found in the biblical manuscripts. But the concept is mentioned many times. For example, Daniel 4:35 asserts, “All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: ‘What have you done?’” We do not find the word omniscient in the Bible either. But the Bible depicts God as all knowing and all wise (See Isaiah 28:29.)

So the issue is not about the presence of the actual word Trinity in the text of the Bible. The issue is whether or not the concept of God as a tri-unity is taught in scripture.

The concept of the Trinity is an inescapable conclusion of two realities. The first is that God is one. Deuteronomy 6:4 states, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” This is part of the prayer that many Jews recite daily.

The second reality is that the Bible depicts the Father, Son, and Spirit as God. Jesus often asserted his divinity, claiming for example that those who had seen him had seen the father. (See John 14:9.) He claimed that he and the Father were one. (See John 10:30.) The Jews understood his claim and attempted to stone him for claiming to be God. (See John 10:33.) These are but a few of the verses that point to Christ’s deity. The Spirit is also identified as God. Peter equates lying to the Spirit with lying to God himself in Acts 5:3-4.

Christians have put these two realities together and described God as being one in essence, but three in persons. The language may be inadequate, but it does give some clarity to the nature of God. This is not a violation of the teaching of Deuteronomy 6:4. The Hebrew word for one in that text is also used in Genesis 2:24, where the Bible describes Adam and Eve and becoming “one” flesh. In that text there is a new unity comprised of two individuals. The Trinity involves a unity comprised of three persons.

Some would argue mathematically that 1 plus 1 plus 1 cannot equal one. That argument is flawed on two counts. First, it reduces an infinite God to the constraints of a mathematical formula. Second, if one were to use math, there is another way to turn the argument around. Since God is infinite, one could ask, “Is not infinity plus infinity plus infinity equal to infinity?”

Some contend that we cannot understand the Trinity, therefore it is illogical. But that argument rests on the presence that anything we cannot fully comprehend cannot be real. There are realities even in science that we don’t fully understand. Think of magnetism or electricity. Consider the subatomic balance of particles in the nucleus of an atom or the presence of a abstract thought in humans. We may have adequate understanding of some of these things. And that is sufficient for us to speak and write about them. Through God’s self-revelation in scripture, we also have adequate knowledge of him. The unanswered questions in theology or science do not prove the non-existence of the realities about which we speak.

If you are going to be accepted or popular in the American culture, you need to become skilled at using marshmallow words. These are words that never have an edge to them or any sharp angles. They are words that do not make contrasts or clear comparisons.

Marshmallow words are soft, pliable, and inoffensive. They don’t dare to call behavior into question. They find good in everything. They resist calling people to a single standard of living because some may find that standard personally unpleasant or objectionable.

Marshmallow words are the currency of political correctness. Universities are skilled in indoctrinating collegians in their use. Academia fosters a culture where the only people branded as outlaws are those who dare to speak otherwise. Social lepers in our day are those who speak of absolutes, of truth and error, and of religious clarity.

But marshmallow words go far beyond political correctness. They quietly become the norm in all our minds. They prompt us to speak in relative terms about things we value. They blur the difference between what is true and what is not. In the church they rob us of the courage to face obvious hypocrisy, falsehood, compromise, and sin. They turn the sword of the Word of God into a useless Styrofoam toy incapable of doing any serious work.

The infection of this kind of language cripples our ability to speak truth in the culture. It exchanges the voice of the prophet for the whimper of youngster intimidated by a pack of bullies. It has made great inroads into Christ’s church today. Truth becomes an opinion. Issues of life and death become commentary. The razor sharp contrasts that we must understand to live righteously and follow Christ faithfully disappear. Marshmallow words take their place. And they are everywhere. I shudder sometimes to see its influence in my own heart.

When the truth of God grips the hearts of his people, there is a change in the way we think and speak. Marshmallow words will no longer do. It’s not a change to bitterness, rage, condescension, or acrimony. It’s the willingness to speak truth in a culture where truth is unwelcome. It’s the courage to speak truth in my own heart when marshmallow words would feel better. It’s the love to speak accurately within the Church when marshmallow words would be much less dangerous. It’s not the language of pride, or self-righteousness, or superiority. It’s the return of the language of reality that permeates the pages of God’s revelation in the Bible.

Here’s an example. In Ezekiel 18:4 God claims, “For every living soul belongs to me.” In that radical statement God asserts that he is the exclusive Lord and Master over every person on the planet. They do not belong to Allah, Buddha, or themselves. The claim is that every human being on the planet is the property of the one God who revealed himself to mankind in the pages of the Old and New Testaments. This challenges any other competing claim—no matter how sincerely held—as false. While we are called to respect the people who claim allegiance to other beliefs, we are not called to respect systems of belief that God labels as false. There is no virtue in whitewashing error. Secular materialism, liberation theology, Mormonism, Islam, and Taoism are wrong. And we must gain the courage to make such statements again. Where faiths collide, we must call thoughtful people to compare and contrast the core documents and the founders. Jesus Christ and the Bible can easily withstand such scrutiny. Marshmallow words, on the other hand, reduce everything to a white mess held together by some sticky goo.

As difficult as it is to think and speak differently than the surrounding culture, Christ-followers must do so. It is the only way we can be faithful followers of the message we bear and the God we seek to serve.

These days it’s impossible to watch television or listen to the radio without running into commercials for gold and silver. These precious metals are portrayed as insurance against hard financial times. If we possess them, we are told, we can sleep well at night. They will deliver us from economic peril. They will rescue us from some of dire consequences of an unstable economy. They are the assets that will safeguard our labors against inflation or other threats. Owning them will make a huge difference in our future and produce peace of mind in uncertain times.

The tendency to secure the future by obtaining precious metals goes back thousands of years. About 600 B.C. affluent Jews were doing the same thing in order to build a hedge against the perils of their day. Like many in our time, they had little use for God and were determined to go their own way. The idea of securing their future by obeying his commands and conforming to his expectations was not something they wanted to consider. They would behave as they felt best and rely on their financial planning to safeguard them from tough times.

Anything that we set up as a savior in difficult times is false security compared to God himself. And God usually finds a way to demonstrate that he alone is our deliverer. God reveals a picture of national suffering to Ezekiel. It will come about because the people stubbornly refuse to follow God’s truth and choose to live autonomously instead. Ezekiel writes, “They will throw their silver into the streets, and their gold will be an unclean thing. Their silver and gold will not be able to save them in the day of the Lord’s wrath. They will not satisfy their hunger or fill their stomachs with it, for it has made them stumble into sin.” (See Ezekiel 7:19.)

God is not opposed to saving and planning. But the minute we transfer our trust to something other than God, we erect an idol that he hates. He will find creative ways to demonstrate that our alternate savior cannot rescue us from the hardships we fear.

He is the only one who can deliver us from life’s threats. That’s why the psalmist celebrates that God is his rock, his deliverer. Psalm 18:2 states, “The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge. He is my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.” This is more than poetry. It is the reality that God calls us to embrace in order to approach life wisely. Real security in uncertain times is not found in any particular kind of human asset. It is found only in a dynamic, personal relationship with the living God.

Cultures cannot thrive when they ignore God. Neither can individuals. Survivors of the Jewish nation sat in the capital of a foreign country, enslaved by foreigners. Everywhere they turned they were reminded of the massive loss that marked their days since the conquest of their nation.

It was about 593 B.C. The Babylonians and Medes were the new superpower of the day, having conquered the Assyrian capital of Nineveh in 612 B.C. In the years to come they would penetrate the last defenses of the Jewish capital of Jerusalem and take the city on August 14, 586 B.C. As Ezekiel writes, about 10,000 Jews had been deported to Babylon as subjects of their new king. Among them was a man named Ezekiel.

God did not forget his people in exile. God gave Ezekiel a message for his fellow Jews. It was not words of false comfort and self-pity, but a call to turn back to him in the midst of their massive loss. In the first three chapters of this revelation, God repeatedly warns his prophet that the people are stubborn and reluctant to respond to his call. “Whoever will listen, let him listen,” God declares. “And whoever will refuse, let him refuse; for they are a rebellious house.” (See Ezekiel 3:27.)

As God assesses their behavior, he notes that their moral behavior had been inferior to the pagan countries around them. “You have not even conformed to the standards of the nations around you,” the prophet declares. (See Ezekiel 5:7.) Followers of Islam routinely look at ‘Christian’ America and note the same thing. Sex saturates our media—from advertising to film to salacious news stories designed to hike ratings. Marriage is under attack as an outmoded relic of the past. Civility in language is less common, even among evangelical Christians who increasingly use expressions that echo the culture. Devotion to God is considered the property of the priestly class (ordained or licensed religious leaders)—not the call to the normal follower of Christ. Ministry is often built around a desire to impress men more than a desire to please God.

The good news in all of this is that God does not go silent even in times when he withdraws a measure of his protective grace from his people. The same God who spoke to the stubborn Jews in exile is the one who speaks to us as we feel the growing hangover of a culture (and to some degree a church) that has become intoxicated with the wine of disobedience and self-centeredness. His awareness of our reluctance to hear does not stop him from speaking.

When times get tough, our natural temptation is to question God’s goodness and love. We tend to see adversity as evidence that God is indifferent or powerless. And the more we fuel those thoughts, the less likely we are to respond to him. In such situations God speaks to remind us that the flaw is not with him, but ourselves. It’s hard to hear that message because it challenges our pride and our inflated sense of our own righteousness. But when we take it to heart, it changes the way we view ourselves and opens the door to greater intimacy with God.

In the August 13^th edition of the Wall Street Journal Brett McCracken analyzes the trend of many in the modern evangelical movement to stem the exodus of young adults from the church by being cool. His article, The Perils of ‘Wannabe Cool’ Christianity, notes that some churches seek to reach the emerging generation through screening of R-rated films, sermon series that focus on sex and sexuality, and Twitter and iPhone interaction during services.

As a twenty-something himself, Mr. McCracken sees the desperate attempts at relevance in such efforts and finds them ultimately unappealing. He writes, “I can say with confidence that when it comes to church, we don’t want cool as much as we want real.”

In the last decade writers like Os Guinness and David Wells have echoed the same message. The desire among modern innovators in the church to reach the emerging generations is laudable. Some argue that in order to do this we must be cool and must build a bridge from the latest trends in society. This approach is desperately flawed because it assumes that what is fashionable or in vogue has the appeal to draw the heart more than what is eternal.

The trend is far from new. In the book of Exodus we find Moses was AWOL on the mountain in the desert as he meets with God. No one is sure if he is dead or will return. The leaders persuade Aaron to build a golden calf to represent the God who delivered them from bondage in Egypt. This kind of animal was a symbol for power and fertility in all the surrounding cultures. Certainly such an act would honor the God who had just delivered his people from slavery. It was simply a tool for worship that all would understand. But God realized it would become an obstacle, not an asset. Under his direction Moses had the idol burned in the fire, ground to powder, and scattered over the water. He even made the sons of Israel drink it. (See Exodus 32:20.)

When the focus shifts from the person and work of the triune God, the church ultimately suffers. The centerpiece of our message to mankind must be Christ and his work. To bank on the shifting trends of modernity is to replace the radical life-transforming reality of God’s investment in our dilemma with something with a limited shelf life. Whenever the American church has traded relevance for truth, it has become less meaningful to the culture, not more.

You and I live in a time when people in power pretend that they can create a state of perfection if they are given enough authority and control over the dimensions of human life.

For the past week much has been written about the discovery of Salmonella bacteria in eggs. Once again, government regulators are using “this-must-never-happen-again” language to attempt to create a biologically impregnable food distribution network. The promise is that if bureaucrats are given enough rules, regulations, and stiff fines, not one American consumer should ever again get sick from anything they consume.

Should food producers do their best to comply with reasonable safety measures? Of course. Should those who knowingly defy best practice procedures face consequences? Certainly. But the posturing of the regulators reflects a hubris that assumes that we can have complete control of our environment in a fallen world. (In this particular case, it also conveys the idea that the American consumer is too stupid to cook eggs and remove the risk the bacteria poses.)

No matter how diligent our efforts, we cannot eradicate the brokenness that is part of our environment—whether it be the presence of a bacteria, the carelessness of someone in a production facility, or the greed of a business owner. Though we may strive for quality, the pledge of perfection rings hollow. It’s like the infatuated remarks of a couple in love who assert that they will never behave in a way to disappoint one another. The nature of the world and the condition of the human heart prevent such absolute promises from coming true.

Our hunger for perfection is understandable. It is a faint echo of the condition our ancestors experienced when the world was young. But it’s not a reality we can achieve on our own. We can taste perfection in this life, but it’s only in relationship with our creator. Deuteronomy 32:4 says of God, “He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he.” Our desire for something totally unblemished, absolutely flawless, is found only in relationship with God. We cannot create perfection through technology or bureaucracy, despite our promises to do so. It comes as we get to know the one whose every thought and action is unspoiled and true. Christ-followers have the privilege of satisfying—to some degree—this hunger for perfection. It does not come through threats and investigations. It comes by pursuing a living relationship with Christ, who graciously relates to members of our imperfect race and restores us to our Father at the cost of his own suffering.

Culture shapes our thinking more than we may admit. It works in invisible ways to reshape the categories of our thought in ways that we cannot see. What we consider to be normal and obvious is sometimes a premise that is arbitrary.

For example, before Copernicus, most people subscribed to early Greek throught that considered the world to be the stationery center of our universe. His heliocentric model was not part of the thinking of either the educated community or the common man. As the tools became available to understand the physical universe, this new information changed the way thinkers looked at the ancient Greek theories.

One of the assumptions of modern skeptics is that the advances in science has made belief in God obsolete. Because we understand more about how processes work under normal circumstances, it is assumed that the physical universe—including man—is part of an impersonal cosmic machine.

Such thinking conceals a huge hidden premise. It presumes that understanding the how answers the why? Why something exists instead of nothing at all is not a question of science, but of philosophy. But when a scientist steps out from behind her test tube in her lab coat, she presumes that her skill at explaining mechanisms in the physical universe carries over into her philosophical declarations about the whys of life. Expertise in one area does not guarantee credibility in a completely different realm.

The materialistic philosophy that is entrenched in many universities rests on an arbitrary philosophical base. It is not a product of deduction or experimentation. Unfortunately, it masquerades as a proven conclusion when it is nothing of the sort. Ordered processes in the universe are ordered processes. They do not falsify the theocentric approach presented in the special revelation of the Bible. One may argue that the sky is blue and go on to state that his mother in law is ugly. Accuracy about the first statement does not insure that the second conclusion is true.

Psalm 53:1 begins with the assertion, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” Modern man may recoil at the statement because it challenges the premise held by many. But the statement of the psalmist should not be rejected simply because we don’t like it.

From the perspective of the God revealed in the Christian scriptures, the denial of his existence is an act of folly. It cuts us off from the reality of a personal God who has spoken to us and who interacts with us in space and time. He has addressed the core “why” questions of life and spoken about our incredible value. He has disclosed the underlying reasons for our brokenness, folly, and self-destructive choices. He describes how his grace makes it possible for us to enjoy a meaningful and eternal relationship with him.

But in order to consider such things, we must at least understand that the premises we bring to the discussion are not the assured conclusions of modern science, but arbitrary philosophical assumptions whose popularity does not guarantee their truthfulness.

The nonstop world of television and radio news gives the public thousands of words an hour assessing the people who serve as leaders—in fields from politics to business to sports to entertainment. Behind this endless critique is the assumption that some kinds of leadership are better than others. If it were all a matter of style, the viewers would largely tune out the debates as pointless. It would be like arguing that it’s better to play checkers with red pieces than black ones.

The character and values of leaders do make a difference. In Jeremiah’s day the Lord addresses the nation that he has forsaken because of their indifference and disloyalty to him. In describing their sorry state, he uses the familiar biblical analogy of people acting like sheep and their leaders taking the role of shepherds. Jeremiah 50:6 states, “My people have been lost sheep; their shepherds have led them astray and caused them to roam on the mountains. They wandered over mountain and hill and forgot their own resting place.”

Though the individuals are culpable, responsibility lies with the leaders as well. In the metaphor, they have been shepherds who have led others astray. What might that mean? In scripture it can include such actions as substituting human wisdom for God’s revealed will; blending authentic worship with pagan customs (syncretism); or ignoring God’s primary directives while focusing on subsidiary issues. (See Micah 6:8.)

God declares that as a result of this kind of inadequate leadership, the people wandered and “forgot their own resting place.” When leaders pick their own destination, they take people away from the place where real rest and security is found. They take people away from Christ and all that he has to offer. And after a while we forget the one who is to be at the center of our lives.

Though we cannot blame our poor choices on those who lead us spiritually, they do make a difference. Those of us who are in that role must be diligent to pursue Jesus. It’s the safest course we can take on behalf of those we seek to lead.

What incentive would it take for someone to persuade you to dress in weird clothing, yell and scream like an idiot, and be seen by millions of people at the same time? For some, all it takes is the possibility of some loot—anything from an assortment of towels to a vacation to a mystery place.

The other day I was working at home and my wife was channel surfing. She flipped to a program I thought was extinct, but one that has somehow survived in the world of daytime television. It was “Let’s Make a Deal.” I was amazed at the audience. Most were wearing outlandish, colorful, and creative outfits. They were more animated and vocal than hometown parents cheering for their high school football team. All this visual and emotional frenzy was part of an effort to get the attention of the game show host or whoever selected the contestants who would get a chance to earn the “big prize” of the day.

One of the oddest realities of this game show is that the contestants don’t even know what they are competing for. All they know is that it is worth thousands of dollars (before taxes). They may wind up with something they would never buy for themselves, or an experience they would not personally enjoy. Someone living in an apartment might win a pool table. Someone on a restricted diet might walk away with a year’s supply of Spam. A homemaker who hates to cook gets enough pots and pans to open a restaurant. In the episode I saw one contestant won a trip to Lake Tahoe. If the contestant was from southern California, that destination might be a place they’ve been to several times. No big deal.

The game show reminded me of the appeal of the world to us all. It promises us the hope of ‘loot’ if we will play by its rules. If we agree with the values of the culture and expend considerable energy, then we may qualify to walk away with the goodies that it has to offer. But exactly what those are is a bit of a mystery. We’ll accumulate things that have dollar value. We’ll taste experiences that are supposed to be memorable. But there is no fixed and certain promise to those who strive. The message is that we are to devote our lives to the culturally expected pursuits and then promised that to some vague measure we’ll get our share of the things it deems valuable.

Like game show contestants, we are invited to be consumers of life. We may not know what we’re chasing. That’s secondary to the call to get whatever is behind door number 1, 2, or 3. We’re supposed to overlook the fact that this pursuit may cost us health and broken relationships. It may leave us addicted, disillusioned, lonely, and hungry for some kind of security and peace that we can’t even name.

Contrast that with God’s offer in Acts 26:18. Paul is recounting the moment when God took him away from his pursuit of religious perfection through legalism. God intercepts his socially acceptable but self-destructive course and redirects this passionate Pharisee. Paul describes his new mission from Christ this way, “to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.” (NASB)

Note the four transitions. The first is from darkness to light. The second is from living under the authority, oversight, or dominion of Satan to that of God. The third is from the burden of unforgiven sin to the certainty of forgiveness. The fourth is from those without an eternal inheritance to those who have one.

None of these are found behind the door of a game show stage—or behind any of the doors that the culture offers us. No human culture can show you how to live in the light of truth, beauty, holiness, of mind and soul. No society can show you an earthly escape from the deceit, compromises, distorted thinking, and misplaced values that have been part of human history since Satan’s first enticement of Adam and Eve. No social agenda can grant you perfect and total forgiveness that combines love and justice. No social philosophy or institution has an inheritance that will outlast this life.

When the video tape has been fully edited and the last commercial has been aired, the contestants of the typical game show return back to their normal lives still hungry for something they may not be able to define. The only way for any of our race to gain that which is of lasting value is to see through the empty promises of our world’s system, refuse to play the role of contestant or consumer, and make our pursuit of Christ paramount.

The other day the growth group I’m part of examined the qualities that Galatians 5:19-21 describe as the “acts of the sinful nature.” This text is a catalogue of consequences that flow from our rebellion against God. It describes the kinds of moral compromise we descend to when we live our lives indifferent to God and independent of his grace and holiness.

One of the words in the list is seldom used today. It’s the word debauchery. The NIV translation often uses the word sensuality to describe the word in other places in the New Testament, but it seems to have a connotation broader than an appetite for the sensual. It includes an attitude that flaunts its choices. Not only is it impervious to social restraint, it’s the spirit that celebrates behavior that is regarded as impure or immoral. It takes an in-your-face approach that flaunts itself. It has no regard for self-respect or the rights and feelings of others. It celebrates the cutting edge of immorality as being a pioneering spirit in rejecting virtue and godly behavior.

There is an impudence, a hubris that flows from our fallen hearts when we reject God and his ways. To defy him and walk in blatant disobedience is one thing. To parade our moral rebellion before mankind, indifferent to the impact of our choices on friends, relatives, and children in the next generation is another. Initial forays into sin often bring us internal conflict because we feel true moral guilt. It’s not pleasant. If we choose to disregard the tension and continue to sin, we desensitize our conscience (See 1 Timothy 4:2) and the conflict becomes less intense. The third stage is to delight in the practice of vice and flaunt it before others as a sign of our independence and our autonomy.

Signs of this kind of behavior in the public square are alarming, because it is at this place where God often abandoned the nation of Israel to its godless future. Those of us who believe that God shapes the fate of men and nations in relationship to our trust in him can be somewhat alarmed at the triumphant display of abandoned virtue that marks our media and our entertainment. The call to live and speak for God is the only antidote to the moral slide that will take us to a place of increased pain and turmoil as a culture.