Firbush Retreats Firbush retreats are organized and led by Robert T. Walker. Firbush retreats are designed to make the best theology accessible to as many people as possible and especially those not trained in theology and often not familiar with routine technical terms. They combine times of worship and prayer with reflection on a theme related to Torrance theology. For more information see https://tftorrance.org/firbush. ----------- June 13, 2018 Firbush Retreat Summer 2018 Gary Deddo, "Creation and Incarnation" https://tftorrance.org/node/1641 The audio recording for this presentation is available on the Firbush Retreat section of the website for the Thomas F. Torrance Theological Fellowship. The following AI transcript is too rough to rely upon, but perhaps useful for word searches and time-stamps. It is unretouched; if anyone wishes to listen to it and clean it up we will be happy to post an improved version (contact the webmasters). We invite speakers to send us slides for their talks, which we will post alongside the audios and transcripts. If any speaker wishes to have their talk removed from the website, just let us know and we'll take down both the audio and the transcript. ------------ 00:00-00:09 How could it even be possible that the world not knowing came from him and he is its very life? 00:09-00:16 How can this even be possible? Well this is a bit of a conundrum really 00:16-00:23 that I want us to consider when we consider incarnation and creation. 00:25-00:30 As we know Barth and Torrance, I'm going to bring them together. My doctoral work was on Karl Barth 00:30-00:35 partly because Tom Torrance was still alive and it really wasn't proper to do a dissertation on 00:35-00:44 someone still living although it's sometimes done. But I chose to study Karl Bart even though I had a 00:44-00:50 great interest in Torrance although Tom had already retired and so I was referred to James and that 00:50-00:58 was a wonderful experience. I have no regrets about that whatsoever. So when I say Torrance 00:58-01:04 in this mostly I'll mean Thomas Torrance and his writings. There may be a few places in here I 01:04-01:09 refer to James but I will say James Torrance so you know I'm speaking about Tom here and 01:09-01:14 Karl Bart because I found actually a lot of overlap between their theologies. 01:16-01:25 And also to get this idea is yes we're not a cult. The denomination that I now work for 01:25-01:32 close to 30 years ago was a cult. It was the worldwide church of God. Herbert Armstrong you may 01:32-01:40 have known him but they converted 25 years ago and as they began to look for a deeper and a truer 01:40-01:48 gospel Jesus Christ came to the center of their attention whereas they were really more like 01:48-01:56 Seventh-day Adventists of a strange sort and concentrated on keeping the Sabbath. 01:56-02:01 That's what God was about. That's what holiness was about. That's what faith was about. That's 02:01-02:09 what the Bible was about. That's what their life is about. They reinvented holy days and such 02:09-02:14 modeled on the on the Old Testament. But as they began to transition through the appointment of a 02:14-02:21 new past a new president and all Jesus Christ took a center stage for them and they began to realize 02:21-02:27 this one is the incarnate one and this is the center of God's story with us and that brought 02:27-02:34 into focus the new covenant for them where they almost completely neglected the new covenant. 02:34-02:42 They were essentially old covenant understood in a very unhelpful legal way of conditioning God 02:42-02:47 by their works so that they could qualify for the kingdom of God. These are terms that they used. 02:47-02:55 But as they began to deal with who Jesus was and began to realize the significance of who he was 02:55-03:00 they also of course Jesus introduced them to the Father and sent them the Spirit and they became 03:00-03:08 Trinitarian but their background was the Trinity was a pagan doctrine because it was a belief in 03:08-03:15 three gods and they were told this over and over and over and over again and for many of it was 03:15-03:22 not easy to get over so many years of being told that but as they dealt with who Jesus was and saw 03:22-03:28 the significance of his incarnation and his atonement and began to see that he is brings us 03:28-03:33 into relationship reconciled us not just to himself but to the Father and the Spirit that 03:33-03:39 we might have life in the Son through the Spirit in honor and worship towards the Father in grace 03:39-03:45 in the new covenant they were transformed just regarded as a modern day miracle against any 03:45-03:50 missiologist this just can't happen I mean it would be like thinking you know someone like the 03:50-03:54 apostle that was like Saul could become the apostle Paul you know that type of impossible 03:55-04:03 but yes it was possible and so part of that they were attracted to as they discovered more and 04:03-04:08 God sent people in their way who actually had come to appreciate Bart and even more so 04:08-04:17 Tom Torrance's writings such as the late Dr. John McKenna some of you may may have known him who 04:17-04:23 became friends and acquaintances with the Torrance's and became a part of the denomination before I did 04:23-04:31 and began to lead them then towards considering this Christ incarnate crucified raised ascended 04:31-04:41 and returning to us they also had contact with Dr. Ray Anderson a student of Tom's and actually 04:41-04:48 Ray Anderson also introduced me to Thomas Torrance's writings when I was at Fuller Seminary 04:49-04:57 as well well Bart and Torrance and see they brought a fresh and penetrating emphasis 04:57-05:01 in their theological considerations on the incarnation and trinity and it can have a 05:01-05:10 huge impact on a on a cult that God used to transform them to renew them to restore them 05:10-05:16 to bring them to theological repentance but that view of course was grounded in scripture not a 05:16-05:21 theory about the incarnation not a theory about the trinity but grounded in scripture but it was 05:21-05:28 also nourished by early church teaching and also enriched much by the reformers especially Calvin 05:28-05:37 there was at this time in in history modern history our modern history a need in preaching 05:37-05:43 and teaching that brought to the fore the importance and significance of the incarnation 05:44-05:50 Protestants have largely neglected a doctrine of incarnation and a doctrine of creation 05:50-05:57 and within it then a proper theological anthropology the emphasis had been for a long 05:57-06:04 time in modern Protestantism on the acts of God for redemption if it paid attention to that at all 06:04-06:11 but not on the being of God nor on the being of the sun the nature of God or the nature of the sun 06:11-06:18 namely the incarnate one the redemption was often the emphasis the redemption of creation 06:18-06:25 but not creation itself and so the work of Bart and Torrance and then was a corrective 06:25-06:34 um to and a new word and of course for some it fell as as a famous quotation that it fell on the 06:34-06:43 the like a bomb on the playground of the theologians um but it was a much needed emphasis 06:43-06:49 the work of Bart and then Torrance amounted to a profound theological infusion into the life 06:49-06:57 of the the church at least the western church the being of God was given serious consideration not 06:57-07:04 just the acts of God what he did for us but who this God is who did these acts for us and this 07:04-07:09 included the being of the son of God that is who is this one who is the one on the cross doing the 07:09-07:17 redeeming work this is the incarnate son of God that's who this is it made a difference who was 07:17-07:23 on the cross doing this work not just the work yeah it got me saved so I don't know who it was 07:23-07:31 but I think thankfully I'm in well there was some of that needed corrected the acts of God 07:32-07:39 were given concentrated attention that were given concentrated attention were creation were 07:39-07:50 redemption and little talk about creation itself this is neglected but they brought back 07:50-07:58 emphasis on creation and redemption because they're coordinated the the what was neglected 08:01-08:07 were coordinated as well what was emphasized led to certain emphasis but that left a couple of 08:07-08:14 things creation and incarnation both neglected and so to bring back incarnation also brought back 08:14-08:21 consideration of creation because the incarnate one see was incarnate in creation as one of us 08:21-08:27 so you had they came together so there was a renewal really of both and these were not 08:27-08:33 creation and redemption were not treated by bart and torrance as separately and of course 08:33-08:39 jeremy's had brought that out but as well as bob's you can see the two are considered together not 08:39-08:51 apart and so creation was considered then in connection with redemption what was injected 08:51-08:55 in the theological discussion called for a concentration on the newer element that had 08:55-09:02 been neglected so much time and effort was giving to filling out the incarnation the person and the 09:02-09:10 sun and it made a difference as I said who was on the cross as to exactly what was accomplished what 09:10-09:15 was the nature of this redemption because then it starts having a rebound effect when you have 09:15-09:20 redemption and you have creation if you think of redemption alone but then you bring this in they 09:20-09:25 start interacting with each other and then you see who was on the cross the incarnate one 09:25-09:32 then affects actually your notion of what was accomplished as well so there has a synergy 09:32-09:39 between incarnation and redemption creation and new creation they started interacting and this 09:39-09:50 led to this quite a theological renewal this concentration on the incarnation on who was our 09:50-09:57 savior had renewing and invigorating us affect us perhaps especially among evangelicals whose faith 09:57-10:07 was in a way centered on the work of redemption christ had saved me some reacted to this new 10:07-10:14 emphasis and they felt that the corrective detracted from the work of salvation and so 10:14-10:21 you know you've heard the phrase you know they were saved by the cross well that's true enough 10:21-10:29 isn't it but there's something missing if that's all you hear and that's all you knew we're not 10:29-10:34 saved exactly really you can't push that too hard that's it's a metaphor isn't it when you put it 10:34-10:42 that way we're not saved by the cross we're saved by the crucified one on the cross but who is this 10:42-10:46 one why didn't one of the either thieves on the other side why didn't they save us they were on 10:46-10:56 crosses well it makes all the difference on who's on the cross the cross being crucified itself 10:56-11:04 doesn't do it but some thought you know you're you're detracting from the work of christ you're 11:04-11:12 you're detracting from the cross of christ you're detracting tom from you see the center of our faith 11:12-11:22 because it's centered in the cross well it did present a challenge because it was a shift in 11:22-11:31 emphasis a deliberate shift because some of the ways in their view of thinking about the cross 11:31-11:38 the work was also off base because it forgot who was on the cross so they knew what they were doing 11:38-11:45 they knew what this corrective uh would bring about some changes at least how some theologians 11:45-11:51 and regular believers would think about what's going on on that cross because what's going on 11:51-11:56 there depends upon who's there the very nature of the work now they were not the first ones to bring 11:56-12:03 this up of course james stories would regularly remember mcleod campbell all the time bring it in 12:03-12:10 another fellow scott who was treated rather poorly by the church for his trying to correct 12:10-12:18 an emphasis uh several couple of generations before but they brought this emphasis back 12:18-12:25 again of course on a biblical basis the person and the work were brought into proper and coordinated 12:25-12:33 relationship uh it is something right about the the intuition that things needed that things were 12:33-12:42 getting re-proportioned by the work that tom torrance was doing it was being reworked um and so 12:42-12:46 people had to wrestle with that and still wrestle with that for when the two are brought in 12:46-12:52 conjunction with one another there is a way in which the person of the sun has a certain priority 12:52-12:58 over what he accomplished for us another is it sheds the person sheds light on the work who it 12:58-13:06 is sheds light on what was done so the person is prior to or behind the work we could say the work 13:06-13:11 reveals and expresses the very being the very nature the very character the purpose the heart 13:11-13:19 the mind of the son who shows us the father because there is no father behind the back of 13:19-13:26 the sun with a different mind a different heart a different purpose so the person and the work can 13:26-13:34 be distinguished the person came to do a work and things wouldn't have come out the same if that 13:34-13:41 person this incarnate son did not do the work complete the work so they can be distinguished 13:41-13:50 but never separated nor neglected one or the other so the person of the incarnate son does the work 13:50-13:56 of reconciliation that brings about and sets up the new creation the work of redemption the work 13:56-14:04 of the sun this work outside of god towards creation though does not constitute the being 14:04-14:08 or the nature of the sun in other words he doesn't take the work in order to become 14:09-14:14 something that he wasn't before like i'd like to be the savior of the world i'd like to be the son 14:14-14:19 of god so if i do this work he doesn't have a contract with god saying so i'll get to be 14:19-14:25 something then finally right will i will i really be your son if i do this work the work is not 14:25-14:33 constituting the nature and the being of the sun but it is intrinsic to who he is he is in his being 14:33-14:39 the redeemer and that's why he does the work he does now i myself had quite a renewal in this even 14:39-14:45 though i didn't totally separate the incarnation and the redemption but when i realized i'm so glad 14:45-14:50 that jesus christ did this work for me i grew up thinking that believing that trusting in it all 14:50-14:56 my life i grew up in a evangelical presbyterian church not a denomination i just evangelical mean 14:56-15:04 gospel centered scripture centered and christ in but i at first for many years i just thought well 15:04-15:10 i'm certainly glad he did that work but you know i don't really know who he is but yeah thanks thanks 15:10-15:20 for the work that's great but it dawned on me one day and it was reinforced by reading tom's theology 15:21-15:31 that the reason this god did this work is because of who he is and that was even more wonderful 15:31-15:40 more wonderful the source is so much greater even than that one particular work 15:40-15:45 he is redeemer in his very being 15:47-15:55 so no wonder he did that work and i benefit from it but you see that became secondary the wonder 15:55-16:01 of who god is and as you know uh james especially but you'll find plenty of it and tom the central 16:01-16:11 theological question is who are you lord or jesus to his disciples who do others say that i am 16:13-16:19 but he doesn't stop there who do you say that i am the who question the who question 16:19-16:24 is even more deep than what have you done for me god today 16:24-16:36 who are you god because what he does is exactly what he does expresses who this god is it doesn't 16:36-16:42 make him into a god that's like that such that he would have been a different god if he had never 16:42-16:48 done this but out of his grace out of his great love adhuth is his freedom 16:48-16:53 to improvise towards his fallen creation 16:53-17:03 to redeem us to renew all creation this is the god who is on the cross 17:03-17:09 this is why he was on the cross this is why he came well this was revolutionary even for me 17:09-17:15 even though perhaps there are others that had to you know turn a few more degrees around the circle 17:15-17:21 in their theological metanoia so torrance's emphasis on the incarnation was a corrective 17:21-17:26 that had a renewing effect on the life of the church and at least a revising effect 17:26-17:34 in academic theology they had an another point to wrestle with but a consideration of the importance 17:34-17:41 of the incarnation on its meaning and significance had an effect on how we understand the work god's 17:41-17:48 work of creation as well this may have been secondary to the effect on our understanding 17:48-17:54 of the redemptive work of christ but it too has made and is making partly because we're 17:54-18:00 talking about it right here today is making an impact and rightly so it's renewing 18:04-18:11 the fact that the son of god assumed to himself whole human nature and here's the point without 18:11-18:18 ceasing to be who and what he was without ceasing mostly in my theology classes i have to make a 18:18-18:25 pretty strong point of this because when we use the word became in english anyway we think stop 18:25-18:32 being something rather and became something else the son of god became son of man so he 18:33-18:38 ceased to be well the early church caught on to this right away and they would often insert 18:38-18:47 remaining what he was he also became one of us that's harder to hold on to right ceasing to be 18:47-18:52 one thing and starting to be another that's somehow easier for us to follow but that's 18:52-19:01 not what we're saying uh when we talk about the incarnation remaining what he was he also became 19:01-19:09 one about assuming our human nature to himself and that revealed something about creation 19:09-19:19 and human nature that becoming while remaining both bodily resurrection and what was more shocking to 19:19-19:27 many bible believing christians the bodily ascension of christ said something about creation 19:27-19:34 that had been neglected lost or perhaps never fully appreciated you see these things coming 19:34-19:40 together start mutually shedding light on one another god was understood to be transcended 19:40-19:46 over creation and yes most of the church but this often meant that god had to remain at least at a 19:46-19:55 deistic distance god winding up creation setting it uh on its own and then saying fine i'll see you 19:55-20:04 later and stepping back and have nothing personally directly to do with his creation god is god could 20:04-20:10 not have some would assume dealings directed dealings with creation and with human nature 20:10-20:16 these two things have you heard it you know well god is infinite and we are finite so we can't know 20:16-20:21 god right how many times have you heard that doing campus ministry for 20 years i heard it just about 20:21-20:27 every other day in a secular university it's just impossible they can't come together but of course 20:27-20:34 sometimes you can think well jesus can be down with us but god the father is like up there you 20:34-20:40 know so we don't have anything you know we i used to have students ask me is this like gary who should 20:40-20:45 i pray to and i say whoa whoa why are you asking that and he says well you know kind of comfortable 20:45-20:53 with jesus you know but i don't know about the father you see in some ways they've forgotten 20:53-21:00 that jesus still is the incarnate son of god remaining what he was and that he has taken us 21:00-21:08 to the father and that he is god with us emmanuel but they had split off the father from the son god 21:08-21:13 the father remaining the creator and at his deistic distance and the son saying see you 21:13-21:19 father i'm going to go down there for a while i'll check back in in a while okay my father says okay 21:19-21:25 i don't i have no interest in going down there ah if you want to go ahead by the way there i might 21:25-21:28 give you something to do while you're down there i certainly wouldn't want to do it 21:28-21:37 so this kind of thing is often i think just in the soup we swim in it's it's in the back of our 21:37-21:42 minds god could not have direct dealings with creation or with human nature they were to get a 21:42-21:50 slightly technical ontological opposites infinite finite they can't have anything to do with each 21:50-21:56 other they've got to stay apart so of course this would be if this is true and the son of god became 21:56-22:00 the son of man he would have to if they really had to stay apart he'd have to cease to be 22:00-22:06 what he was see this is why it's easy to fall into that trap you start assuming they can't have 22:06-22:10 anything to do with each other then even if you believe in the incarnation kind of 22:11-22:20 you think well he ceased to be what he was and he just became well simply and only like us but the 22:20-22:26 incarnation is remaining what he was so but it's right if you're assuming this ontological opposites 22:26-22:31 that they couldn't mix divine and human could not mix like oil and water can't really be 22:31-22:35 mixed you can kind of stir them up but like 10 seconds later they're separated 22:38-22:44 yes they could be drawn up next to each other but not really united not really be brought together 22:44-22:51 in the one person as bob was telling us earlier today in the one person but torrance's concentration 22:51-22:57 on the real and true and complete incarnation including the bodily resurrection the bodily 22:57-23:03 ascension and of course the bodily return challenged this background assumption if the 23:03-23:11 eternal son of god was truly incarnate then god and man god and created creation in time and space 23:11-23:18 must be somehow compatible not so opposite at least in a such a way that they cannot have any 23:18-23:24 real contact no they can have real contact they can be in real relationship they can have true 23:24-23:32 interaction and genuine personal connections this is tremendous well especially if you're assuming 23:32-23:41 the separation the oil and water it is a mighty truth a surprising truth and it can be also 23:41-23:50 offensive do we really want god that close that nearby we'd rather have him be at a safe distance 23:50-23:54 well we call him down when we need him but you know after that it's kind of like okay see you 23:54-24:01 god like you know i need my space down here so it can be uh threatening in a certain way as 24:01-24:08 different as god's uh the torrance let's see i lost my place here uh torrance's elevating of the 24:08-24:14 coordinated fact of union and communion with god through christ and by the spirit further reinforced 24:14-24:20 confirmed and elevated the close personal connection of god with human creation for many 24:20-24:26 this was an astounding revelation of blinding and life giving light as different as god's nature and 24:26-24:36 human nature was there could be a union and communion without fusion but with no separation 24:36-24:44 without confusion but not uh separation god and creation could draw together could be together at 24:44-24:55 the deepest level of human being all accomplished by grace or by the grace of god's love 24:56-25:02 the upshot jesus christ had everything to do with creation just as so much scripture affirmed the 25:02-25:10 one who is redeemer is the one who redeems what came into being through him including human nature 25:10-25:15 god the father is not creator alone but the father creates through the son in the spirit 25:15-25:20 and the father redeems through the son and in the spirit there's no split between 25:20-25:28 the father and son so another healing happens here as well in our faith and in our worship of seeing 25:28-25:40 the the father and the son are one in will in mind in act in redeemer the whole god is our savior god 25:40-25:48 in the new testament not just jesus so we don't need to worry about oh is there some kind of father 25:48-25:55 that has a different mind a different attitude than the son a very common theme 25:55-26:02 throughout the torrance's work because often i think just out of fear and just out of anxiety 26:02-26:08 we may think oh i don't know you know the son seems to be trustworthy but i don't know about 26:08-26:15 the father he may have other plans after all he's the judge and in charge you see of of the law 26:15-26:20 where jesus is the nice guy and you can trust him and he came down here after all 26:20-26:32 and so we can trust him the upshot is that jesus had everything to do with creation so it is not 26:32-26:38 only that the creation and redemption are not separated but the father and son are not separated 26:38-26:44 the whole god is creator the whole god is savior there is no opposition or separation in the being 26:44-26:55 of god nor in the works of god they do the works together jesus says i only do what i see the father 26:55-27:00 is doing so when he went up on the cross what was the father doing 27:00-27:07 yeah was he absent was he off on holiday 27:08-27:14 are you just sitting around waiting to you know to get a text from his son did the work what do you 27:14-27:25 think see it's easy to think isn't it there's a split there's a separation between the father 27:25-27:28 and son there is a distinction of person but we're not going to get into the doctrine of 27:28-27:37 the trinity right now okay there is a distinction of person but there is no separation they 27:37-27:43 contribute to the work of salvation each in their own way as the persons they are but as the whole 27:43-27:53 god not separated certainly not opposed to one another so there's no operation or opposition or 27:53-27:58 separation in the being of god nor in the works of god what a wonder what a joy and for many there 27:58-28:03 came into view a wholeness of faith and a unity of worship and a greater coherence in their 28:03-28:10 understanding that freed a mind from being double-minded and freed hearts to be wholehearted 28:10-28:14 towards the whole god father son and holy spirit creator and redeemer 28:14-28:25 and i think this is why so many of us were drawn to hear this repeated by the torrentzes but also 28:25-28:32 showing us taking us right back to scripture over and over again so the theology fed our reading of 28:32-28:38 scripture and i don't know how many times i and others have said is i can't believe i read this 28:38-28:45 word a hundred times and never saw this and so our theology feeds our ability to listen to scripture 28:45-28:52 when it's done in the right key and that reading of scripture then feeds and corrects and continues 28:52-28:59 to nourish our theology it becomes a dynamic circle just continuing on never stopping never 28:59-29:03 stopping to hear the word never stopping to incorporate that word and how we express it 29:03-29:07 theologically that which takes us back to scripture and gives us eyes to see things that were 29:07-29:17 covered up hidden from us this is the experience of so many that i have come to know and often we 29:17-29:22 we when we tell our stories well it sounds like pretty much what you're hearing from me 29:23-29:30 but i'm so glad i'm not alone in this for some in the church there's this is still a message to be 29:30-29:36 heard or to be fully appreciated there's still a need for a renewing corrective in healing these 29:36-29:42 disconnections in the splits in god and in god's work an emphasis on the meaning and significance 29:42-29:48 of the incarnation and its implications for how we grasp redemption and creation and the whole 29:48-29:55 of god's relationship to creation can never be relinquished at least not by me i'm sure not by 29:55-30:02 you it's just too good a news it's too true it's too deep it's too mind-blowing we can barely grasp 30:02-30:11 it however if we go back from when bart began to bring this out 50 or 60 years on now and then 30:11-30:17 torrance picked up and carried it forward in so many ways they've arisen what i have what i regard 30:17-30:22 as aberrations from this renewing emphasis on the incarnation so now you're going to get kind of 30:22-30:27 some of the bad news and critique so we've just reached the high point i could stop just right 30:27-30:35 there and just have a worship service but um it seems to me that some things have gone wrong 30:35-30:41 even starting out with bart and torrance so we're going to talk about that a little bit and perhaps 30:41-30:46 you have kind of run into this perhaps not so it might be kind of preparing you for what you might 30:46-30:52 hear or perhaps you've wondered and been confused about things i've had a number of pastors in my 30:52-30:58 denomination kind of say i'm hearing some other things i'm not sure how it fits together uh could 30:58-31:06 you explain this to me and there's also cultural pressure that's coming from outside the church 31:06-31:11 to take some of this and push it off in an unhelpful well and actually a mistaken direction 31:11-31:16 so i'm going to talk about that uh too this is not going to be near as exciting but i think 31:16-31:23 important so see what you think there have arisen aberrations from this renewing emphasis on the 31:23-31:30 incarnation yes this is to be expected no doctrine can be so articulated in such a way that it cannot 31:30-31:34 be misunderstood or misused i think many theologians think they're going to do it they're 31:34-31:38 going to have the final word so that can no one could ever misunderstand it or misuse it 31:38-31:44 and of course if they haven't done it yet they will do it or find someone will and of course 31:44-31:51 sometimes the criticism is if a theology hasn't been able to do that not be misused not be 31:51-31:57 misunderstood it's false i don't know how many times of course that's part of the part of the 31:57-32:03 criticism of bard and torrance and well basically any theologian we're still looking for the ideal 32:03-32:09 which means a theology the final theology that can never be misunderstood and never be misused 32:09-32:17 by anybody under any circumstances well this is just silly and it's never should be a criteria to 32:17-32:27 dismiss and so it you know this should be accepted it's to be expected yes so it it means just 32:27-32:35 theological metanoia that is repentance and god's sanctifying and gracious purposes among his own 32:35-32:44 people and outside needs to continue so we need to you know keep cleaning things up so this is a part 32:44-32:49 of what we're going to try to do here a little bit you can find plenty of places where t.f torrance 32:49-32:53 and others guarded against these aberrations that i'm going to be mentioning that are sometimes 32:53-33:00 promoted even by those who formerly were tutored by the torrance's or perhaps were familiar with 33:00-33:05 their teachings and rejected them and now want to improve beyond i don't know how many books are 33:05-33:12 beyond bard or after bart i haven't there are books out there beyond torrance i don't know yet 33:12-33:18 there there'll be a day don't worry it'll come behind the back of torrance yeah something like 33:18-33:23 that that would be a yeah hang hang on to that title someone will maybe be willing to pay you for 33:23-33:31 it when the emphasis when the incarnation is emphasized at the expense of the work of christ 33:31-33:40 okay there's one aberration or when the incarnation is regarded as the revelation of a general 33:40-33:49 principle about creation and not a gracious deliberate act of god then things can go very 33:49-33:56 wrong now these are the two aberrations i'm going to talk about when the incarnation is emphasized 33:56-34:03 in such a way that the atoning work of christ is diminished or neglected the error can arise that 34:03-34:12 the incarnation itself is saving in other words if the son of god just took on flesh and that's it for 34:12-34:21 i don't know 10 seconds a year or so but he did not do the receive the judgment of god against 34:21-34:28 evil and sin and pay the price of the atoning work you know we would be saved the incarnation itself 34:28-34:37 saves god joins himself to creation and bingo it's now the saving work is done the incarnation 34:37-34:45 is saving in and of itself de-emphasizing or even dismissing some find the atoning work of christ 34:45-34:52 uh a an offense now there are offensive ways to do it that are not true to the nature of the 34:52-34:57 atonement it's for instance not child abuse there's some who are saying it is child abuse 34:57-35:04 and therefore we reject it we repudiate all the atoning work of christ because that is nothing 35:04-35:12 but and nothing else than child abuse the father abusing the son you can find that in quite a few 35:12-35:21 us seminaries teaching and training pastors but the proper a proper way a biblical way 35:21-35:26 grasping and understanding who this christ is and who this father is in the nature of their 35:26-35:34 relationship and therefore what the atoning work does not mean that we emphasize the incarnation 35:34-35:38 at the expense of the atonement but some are going that way now i give you one of the most radical 35:38-35:46 examples of that but there are far less the act of christ taking on human nature can take center 35:46-35:51 stage so that without the cross of christ or even his whole life of obedience incarnation itself can 35:51-35:59 be regarded as all that's necessary the incarnation in and of itself can be regarded as reconciling 36:00-36:06 and completing the reconciliation as if nothing else would need to happen reconciling and 36:06-36:14 justifying some have said the incarnation simply demonstrates that god has been or is now reconciled 36:14-36:20 to creation and that god honors his creation and this is what he's trying to tell us through the 36:20-36:25 incarnation it just says you see everything's okay between god and us because i can come down 36:25-36:32 and be with you you see so you thought that wasn't the case well the incarnation tells you it is see 36:32-36:38 here i am i'm happy to be with you i honor creation as it is i'm helping you have a new 36:38-36:44 truth in your minds i'm here you see i don't have anything against you everything's fine 36:44-36:52 and the incarnation does the whole thing so there is no separation nothing that interposes between 36:52-37:00 god and his creation you see how the the passage from john that i read he comes into the world the 37:00-37:08 world is his but it knew him not why well the you have to read the rest of the gospel to to fill 37:08-37:17 that out something has interposed and it has to be undone and redone it's not just a general truth 37:18-37:24 the torrance's have been accused sometimes of promoting this view trevor hart actually quite 37:24-37:29 a number of years ago wrote a long article to resist this kind of idea sometimes called 37:29-37:37 physical redemption it's been repudiated many times in many ways the emphasis on the incarnation 37:37-37:44 was a correction but not a replacement for the importance of significance of the saving justifying 37:44-37:51 work of the only son of god yes the incarnate one all right but you can make it the whole story 37:51-37:59 and instead of bringing into focus an essential aspect of that story who is this one who died 37:59-38:08 came lived died raised ascended and returning some have taken on the idea taken the idea of 38:08-38:14 incarnation further and made it into a general principle in that case the incarnation reveals 38:14-38:20 a general and universal principle that god is joined and united to everyone and everything 38:20-38:26 all is god god is all we're all together and the incarnation is just one example of that 38:26-38:36 some are approaching union with christ as a kind of fusion of christ with all christ we are christ 38:36-38:41 your christ we're all christ everybody's christ and the incarnation proves it some are going in 38:41-38:50 this direction perhaps you haven't run into them i hope you don't but you might um and so often when 38:50-38:57 people hear the word though this ontological union right so or the hypostatic union these are 38:57-39:03 technical words but sometimes used even in popular preaching and teaching is that christ you know 39:03-39:08 joined himself there is a hypostatic union between divinity the divine nature and the human nature 39:08-39:15 in the person of christ but many people when they hear that thinking union with christ means a kind 39:15-39:23 of fusion with christ i am christ you are christ we're all christ and the incarnation is an example 39:23-39:28 of that you see see the divine and human nature can are just fused together and jesus is a 39:28-39:36 particular example of what's generally true you're christ you're christ we're all christ we're and so 39:36-39:44 this is an aberration but you can see if you just have the incarnation in the and make it not into 39:44-39:53 a particular act that god did in a particular person to bring about a new thing a radically 39:53-39:59 new thing then if you make it a general principle you've actually changed everything there's no 39:59-40:05 did you mention you mentioned something about the particular i think jeremy this the particular the 40:05-40:14 particularity of the work of god the particular of each person we're not just fused uh jerry you also 40:14-40:19 use the idea this god is a blanket yes this undulating blanket that just kind of gently 40:20-40:25 floats over on us western ways of thinking think if you really want to know what reality is 40:25-40:31 it's a general truth the general is what is true 40:31-40:40 this is what we think if you really want to know see and we de-emphasize the particular 40:41-40:51 but in god's uh economy the particular is very very important and the truth can be in the 40:51-40:59 particular in this particular one this particular person this particular act the particular 40:59-41:08 is true but it can also be the universal that is applicable to all the particulars yes this 41:08-41:16 is a burden of colin gunton in his book the one and the many and so uh to make it into a general 41:16-41:23 truth the revelation of a general truth the incarnation then changes the whole nature of 41:23-41:30 everything and it empties the gospel as well but when people hear the word ontological or union 41:30-41:37 with christ many people then just think it means a fusion a fusion of being that static automatic 41:37-41:44 fixed state of being and but this these are also serious misunderstandings of tom torrance who 41:44-41:51 work tirelessly to actually correct that but these aberrations persist this is why giving 41:51-41:57 full weight to torrance's insistence on the personal and particular nature of god 41:57-42:05 and the personal particular nature of human beings and a real personal relationship between god and 42:05-42:12 human beings as individuals in community and in communion with one another that's why grasping 42:12-42:17 this is so important you just can't take the incarnation and do anything that you want with it 42:17-42:24 and especially as a general principle and of course you can find all kinds of things where 42:24-42:31 torrance resists this directly persistently because he knows how they can be misunderstood 42:32-42:38 so these personal relationships this is what the saving work is it's not a general blanket 42:38-42:41 thing i'm going to go down there and do it and i don't know who's going to be affected or anybody 42:41-42:48 i mean this is a proper lease or proper notion of election god's setting his affection on each one 42:48-42:55 not that he doesn't see us all belonging together but we are both together and distinct not confused 42:55-43:03 with each other either we are one in christ but we're not fused and we are not confused with each 43:03-43:12 other or with christ or with god so the casa don't in uh formula that bob shared with us is very it'll 43:12-43:20 come back into play over and over and over again to keep us in in in the right track um but let's 43:20-43:27 see so these personal relationships of which the saving relationship is one is done by the person 43:27-43:34 of jesus it's deliberate it's purposeful it's decisive it's interactive and it establishes a 43:34-43:40 relationship you can see why my comment about the the dynamic relationship came up earlier 43:40-43:47 that's that's what i was going on about see this is the nature god doesn't just work in general 43:47-43:57 general principles general truths abstract uh principles it is personal and particular because 43:57-44:02 this is who this god is working personally and particularly in jesus christ and coming after us 44:02-44:08 personally particularly in jesus and then by the spirit do you notice how jesus interacts with 44:08-44:16 personal persons in particular in the new testament it's amazing you do not get general principles 44:16-44:22 you get jesus dealing with the woman at the well dealing with zaki is sitting up in a tree dealing 44:22-44:28 with matthew the task collector sitting at his desk dealing with the paralytic who's sitting 44:28-44:41 by the pool and how many times does he say exactly the same thing very seldom jesus is so tuned in 44:43-44:51 to each particular situation and says exactly the right thing how can he say to zaki is 44:51-44:56 i'm going to come to your house and eat with you and he says yeah yes you are come on over 44:56-45:06 he's prepared his word to them in particular at that time and at that place sets them free 45:08-45:15 to respond to his word god is a personal particular at the fullness of time 45:15-45:20 when his hour had come 45:20-45:28 see this is the personal god who acts personally because god is ultimately the source of all 45:28-45:35 personhood and is person or personnel himself in the three persons of the father the son and the 45:35-45:41 holy spirit without correction or speaking of the ontological aspect of christ's nature 45:41-45:50 right saying this it's personal individual dynamic without that correction the idea of union with 45:50-45:57 christ what i've seen has often come to mean an almost undifferentiated automatic or naturally 45:57-46:06 co-joined being i'm just glommed into jesus but that is not what union with christ means it's not 46:06-46:15 a fusion of persons without this correction god will be regarded as naturally co-joined with 46:15-46:22 creation you see if the incarnation is general god comes down he says see you missed it creation 46:22-46:28 i and creation are just kind of one in being and you missed it so i'm going to give you 46:28-46:33 an illustration or an example of what's generally true called the incarnation 46:33-46:41 well that's not what the incarnation is about as corrective as it is 46:41-46:50 it's not a particular instance of a of a universal truth without this correction creation can be 46:50-46:57 regarded as a divine or quasi divine sorry creation can be regarded itself as divine or quasi divine 46:57-47:04 and salvation as merely becoming more and more divine that divine spark in us just getting a 47:04-47:10 little more oomph getting a little more voltage a little more well amperage and that's all it's 47:10-47:15 happened that's what salvation is is becoming more and more divine realizing the natural spiritual 47:15-47:22 potential in us and that's a natural connection and it's a part of the evolution of god's 47:22-47:27 creation and the incarnation see as an example of that jesus kind of you know was a super spiritual 47:27-47:34 guy and that's the same for all of you so don't be surprised that the same things kind of happen 47:34-47:40 with you creation will be regarded then without this correction as a divine or quasi divine and 47:40-47:49 salvation as becoming bit by bit divine sharing in the divinity of the father and the spirit 47:49-47:56 or it could go in the opposite direction thinking of god as simply the highest creature see and 47:56-48:03 the highest creature now this is actually where my denomination in its cult days came from god 48:03-48:08 was a material being and we were going to become god as god as god that's actually what they taught 48:09-48:16 there are other denominations that make well the mormons really think of god in material terms god 48:16-48:26 is just a super created thing being and and we're not we're we're moving up to that there's no 48:26-48:34 distinction between god and creation no creation ex nihilo out of nothing we have our being and 48:34-48:40 god's being is related to our being and our being is related is not only related but is joined well 48:40-48:47 let me use the word ontologically naturally automatically mechanically impersonally just 48:47-48:55 fused with god and so but god can just be the greatest creature a material being the same kind 48:55-49:03 as created things so it can also go that way if we talk about the ontology of god this is overall 49:03-49:09 a kind of christian i'm going to call it christian gnostic pantheism or panantheism these are this 49:09-49:15 more formal names sometimes people will use it sometimes people will be thinking this way but 49:15-49:22 they don't know the labels that have gone with it so a pant pantheism is when all of god is all of 49:22-49:28 creation and all of creation is all of god they're one and the same they're coterminous okay two 49:28-49:36 circles perfectly overlap with one another panantheism is all that is created is in god pan 49:36-49:44 and all in theism god all all is in god even though there might be more to god than creation 49:44-49:51 but they're united and fused in being there's a continuity of divine being and created being 49:51-49:56 whether there might be a little bit more that's of god so some will say is for instance creation 49:56-50:03 is the body of god all right it's his body but he's got a mind or a spirit that's more than that 50:03-50:12 but notice there's still an overlap entirely all of creation is in god as a kind of a union 50:12-50:24 a fusion a continuity a natural ordinary automatic continuity of being the same kind of 50:25-50:32 being so in that case christ gives us a general but hidden knowledge about a universal and general 50:32-50:38 truth about god and about creation believing this truth then is in that framework what amounts to 50:38-50:49 salvation like wake up whoa okay we're one and that's that's it the primary problem is that the 50:49-50:56 incarnation without atonement and the incarnation as a general universal truth eliminate all of what 50:56-51:04 is meant by god's grace and being in real personal relationship the communion or the coignan of the 51:04-51:10 spirit with god salvation without atonement and incarnation is a general truth eliminate any 51:10-51:17 personal deliberate and direct act of god of god's love intervening in a fallen world to overcome 51:17-51:26 evil and conquer its ultimate consequence death separation from god and even non-being grace in 51:26-51:33 these false schemes have turned into nature okay you can grab onto some of these this is kind of 51:33-51:43 pulling it together now um let's see do i have another page i think i do good i do um and there's 51:43-51:50 no real interactive dynamic relationship you see it's just a truth it's like the sky is blue see 51:50-51:56 you've all been living under it it's just did you notice the sky is blue see look up there it is it's 51:56-52:03 been there all the time you see it becomes like that salvation then becomes impersonal automatic 52:03-52:08 a general truth that blankets i've got it right here the blankets all 52:09-52:14 it just floats over us all it calls for no repentance no real relationship of faith and 52:14-52:22 hope and love for god and for worshiping this god and receiving the gift of the free act 52:22-52:29 of a costly reconciling and atoning work that didn't have to happen it's not necessary 52:29-52:34 that when god acts all that he acts is according to who he is 52:35-52:42 and so it's appropriate to this god it's not accidental it's not necessary but it is what 52:42-52:49 god has done his reconciling and atoning love so perhaps we can see some ways in which an 52:49-52:55 incarnation without an atonement an incarnation as a general principle could be attractive 52:55-53:03 why well one of the reasons might be it's a grace so cheap it costs neither god nor us anything 53:05-53:11 pretty cheap just general just accept the idea see that's kind of why it's not why i'm calling 53:11-53:19 it gnostic you just realize an idea and then there you are it's done of something that's general and 53:19-53:26 true it's a grace so cheap it costs god nor man anything we are simply swept along with the flow 53:26-53:33 of things no costly atonement no costly death to our pride no faith in a freely given grace that 53:33-53:39 cannot be deserved or repaid no daily communion with a personal god who relates to us particularly 53:39-53:44 and individually as members of his body rather we have a unity that dissolves all differences 53:44-53:52 significant differences that and and so real it dismisses real exchanges real interaction 53:52-54:00 real receiving god's forgiveness and giving thanks back for it all is built in automatic mechanical 54:01-54:08 abstract and yes universal so it can have an appeal it makes sense why it might have a lot 54:08-54:15 of appeal and it it is and it's growing and you can see this in secular culture perhaps especially 54:15-54:21 the corrective theological work done by the torrance's was indeed renewing and restoring 54:21-54:27 and it is still needed but one cannot build on their foundation and indeed on the biblical or 54:27-54:34 apostolic foundations of the church and affirm what are opposite opposite errors than the ones 54:34-54:40 that are correcting they arise on the basis these errors arise on the basis of logical inferences 54:40-54:46 made from selected parts of biblical revelation or the torrance theology or bart or from other 54:46-54:53 extra-revelational philosophical assumptions that assume a natural continuity of the being between 54:53-54:59 god and humans between god and creation and then someone a christianizing saying see the incarnation 54:59-55:07 is just saying the same thing well it's not and so as applies to every doctrine more than one error 55:07-55:13 often needs to be guarded against neither the left nor the right a single corrective becoming 55:13-55:20 in the long run the total truth fosters often an opposite error so there are times and places where 55:20-55:26 a full orb theology that has benefited tremendously from the torrance corrective and renewal must also 55:26-55:32 address opposite errors that some may insist are merely extensions of the doctrine of the 55:32-55:39 incarnation or perhaps improvements upon it so it behooves us all to return to the biblical 55:39-55:46 foundations and to the whole council of scripture and yes to return to tft and others who take up 55:47-55:53 in their own theology more comprehensive the whole of biblical teaching so that we guard against 55:53-56:00 these opposite errors and to appreciate again the whole of the gospel of jesus christ the only son 56:00-56:08 of god incarnate who came to do a costly redeeming reconciling renewing and particular work for you 56:08-56:24 and me in particular for us and our salvation amen thank you so much carrion we've got about