Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Our Father in Heaven, thank you for who you are, what you do, how you have granted us salvation full and free in Christ Jesus, how you have granted us your Spirit, how you, Father, Son, and Spirit, guarantee our salvation until the day of Christ Jesus.
Lord, would you attend here this morning as we study your Word, as we study what men have taught throughout the history of the Church with regard to the Trinity, help us to better grasp it, help us to understand that even better, smarter men and women than us have stumbled into error, and so keep us humble and keep us focused.
In Jesus' name, Amen. Yeah, even as I've been reading the last few days about what we'll be talking about next week, it's amazing some of the brilliant theologians and the bad decisions that they've come to.
Okay, last week we left off talking about Psalm 102 and about how it does speak about Jesus. That was question number 11. Is there anybody who doesn't have a quiz? Because I believe that there are a few extras laying around.
Quiz number 7. My trusty assistant here in the back has them right next to him and doesn't even know it. You have chapter 5, so that's why you didn't know it. Well, here's chapter 7, and I might have a few more up in the front.
I don't know. Let's find out. I'm on pins and needles. Let's see if I have more. You do have one. Okay, so is there anybody who doesn't have one? Seeing none, we move on. I have one that we can make copies of should we need them.
Okay, number 12. Moving to number 12. True or false, Jesus does not find his source in the Father. I know that's a hard one to start out with. We need to break the question down. Jesus does not, meaning he does not find his source.
He does not have his source in the Father. We'll see. If I start answering questions like that, I might as well just answer the question. If I start answering questions like that, well, I mean, what do we think?
If I say, what is the source of the Nile, what do you think? First of all, you think I have no idea. But secondly, what do you think? You think it is the, what's the source of the Nile? The starting point, right?
So, if I say then, Jesus does not find his starting point in the Father. Yeah, it's a big sigh there. His source, or, well, let's put it this way, his origination. But let's get back to what we were talking about last week.
If I say the Son is eternally generated by, or eternally begotten by the Father, eternally begotten by the Father, what do I mean? Okay, he's always been. Let's go ahead and open your Bibles to Hebrews 1, verse 3.
Hebrews 1, 3, and if somebody would read that, please, when they get there. Okay, thank you. When he says, when the Bible says that he is the radiance of his glory, it's Jesus who is the radiance of whose glory?
The Father's. Okay, let's listen to what Barrett says. By the way, the answer is false. He does not find his source in the Father. Yes, he does. The Father is the Son's eternal source, his everlasting principle, which is why Hebrews 1, 3 describes the Son as the radiance of the glory of God.
The Father is not the Son's creator, but he is the Son's Father. He did not create his Son, but generated him from all eternity. That's why we say he's eternally generated, he's eternally begotten. And there's a big difference between being created and being eternally generated.
In our minds, is it hard to fathom that? Yes, but our minds want to make us what? Disciples of Arius. We want to say to ourselves, well, if Jesus is eternally begotten, that means he was born, which means he has a temporal beginning, a beginning in time.
He's a created being, which makes us heretics. Who should be burned to the stake? Oh, sorry. That's just where our minds go. We want to grasp the Trinity, we want to understand God fully. We want him to be more, dare I say, like us.
And that's what heretics always do, is lower God, make God easier to understand, the concept of the Trinity easier to understand, and they stumble into heresy that way. This is, I don't know who it is, but it's Barrett quoting somebody.
Unlike the imagery of James 1 .17, where clear lines of discontinuity are drawn between the immutable father of lights and his mutable creaturely offspring, what does James 1 .17 say? It compares us to him.
Let me read James 1 .17. I mean, in whom there is no shifting of shadow, you know, all that. So that's where we're going. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
God does not change, right? He is not like us. And so he says, unlike the imagery of James 1 .17, where clear lines of discontinuity, meaning differences between us and the immutable father of lights, the imagery of Hebrews 1 .3 suggests that the father should be understood as the natural principle of the son.
As light naturally radiates its brightness, so too God naturally radiates his son. Lights and its splendor are one. God naturally radiates his son. That captures the heart of eternal generation. The son is the resplendent effulgence of the glory of God.
Questions, thoughts, comments? Heresies? Okay. I always like to check and see if we have any heresies we'd like to bring forth. Yes. Well, that's a good question. How do we think of the spirit? Is he the radiance of the sun?
That's the question. We probably don't think of him that way, as you said, Jonathan. If we said, well, I mean, I don't want to say that, because we're going to get into the Holy Spirit directly. Yeah.
But if we said, in a sense, that he shines forth from the father and the son, we could say that, certainly. Almost, except for, you know, we do have to be careful, because otherwise we'll be waiting for the spirit to talk to us, right?
So, okay. We'll hold the spirit questions for when we get to the spirit. Number 13, true or false? Jesus can be said to be the imprint of the father because of eternal generation. Now, that should be pretty straightforward.
Sorry? True, yeah. Barrett says, in a similar fashion, Hebrews switches metaphors from light to imprints, but only to convey the same points. Plus, Hebrews says the son is the exact imprint of God's nature, once again confirming the co-equality of the son with the father.
Yet, as an imprint, he is not the same person as the father. Same nature, yes, but distinguished as the son is from the father, much like an imprint from its originating template or source. Now, you know, some questions arise from that.
Does the concept of imprints undermine, take away from, what we learned about his radiance? Does it make him less? I mean, even this idea, you know, true or false? Bonus question. The further you move away from a light bulb, the less light it gives.
The less light you see, right? I mean, if you're a mile away and you have a clear line of sight to that light bulb, is it as bright as it is if you're right next to it? You ever stand right next to a light bulb?
I do because I'm stupid. You know, you get right next to it. What happens when you get right next to the light bulb? It blinds you. And, what else do you, you know, are there any differences? For one, well, let me ask, I'll just ask the question.
Do you feel the heat from the light? Yes. But if you're some distance away, do you feel the heat? No. So, does that mean if Jesus is the radiance of his glory, does that mean the further, or does that mean you're going to see less of him the further?
I don't even know how to say that. Does that mean he's less than the Father? And the answer is no. These are all, you know, I mentioned this and somebody asked me about it and I think I talked about it briefly last week.
Let's just talk about accommodation of language, right? When God speaks to us through his word, I see that, I see that hand. Okay. When God speaks to us through his word, are we to understand everything in the Bible literally?
What's that? Or exhaustively? Well, I guess what I'm saying is, you know, can we, what God has revealed to us, is that the fullness of the reality of God? Well, why is that? We may not be capable of understanding it.
So, God uses language. In essence, he, you know, I think it's Pastor Mike, some great theologian like that, who said, you know, essentially this is divine baby talk. Well, what does he mean? When you're talking to a one-year-old, do you start saying, you know, words like, well, I'll tell you something, young man.
When I was your age, we would, you know, exercise a modicum of restraint. No, you don't talk to him like that. Why? Because he, if you're lucky, lucky, he understands words like, yes, no, dad, dad, mama, you know, and a few other things.
You know, I mean, if you were to listen to my mom while she was alive, I was reading the sports page when I was one. But most kids, not true, but, you know, the legend grows, right? So, when we talk about accommodation of scripture, we get images in our mind about God from the word, and those things are true, but they are not the fullness of truth.
We can't grasp the fullness of God. We can't grasp the fullness of divine, of the divine nature. So, what we have are accommodations to help us, to push us in the right direction, but we don't have, we don't get the full picture.
So, again, this is, this is Berenice quoting John Webster. He says, the metaphor of imprinting does not take us in a different direction from that of effulgence, fullness of his glory, brightness, but reinforces it by speaking of the sun as the exact representation of the divine essence.
Again, this is an analogy, but if you've seen money being printed, and I mean, who hasn't these days? If you've seen money being printed, you know, you see, you can see the plate, and you see the bill, and you can see where the bill, you know, the ink hits the paper.
Yeah, this is the word I was looking for. And, and makes the bill, and you understand that what went on that bill is exactly what was on the plate, right? That's the, am I helping you guys to counterfeit?
I don't know. But that's the idea. When we see the Lord Jesus Christ, when we read about him in scripture, what we're seeing is the radiance, the imprint, the exact nature of the Father. And that's how we're to understand him.
Let's see, both accentuate, both those ideas accentuate the son's eternal origin from the Father's essence. Now, he asked this question, Barrett does, are we imposing this concept of eternal generation on Hebrews?
Reading it into the text, eisegesis, that's what it means, to read something into the text, to impose something on the text, rather than drawing it from the text. Then he answers his own question, not at all.
For if you keep reading, you will discover that the author transitions from the imagery of radiance and imprint to the vocabulary of begetting itself. Which leads us to question number 14. True or false?
Psalm 2, verse 7, maybe we should read that. Well, or I could just give you the essence of it, the Cooley-Standard version. Today, I have begotten you. So, Psalm 2, verse 7 says, today, to point to the day that Jesus became king.
True or false? I heard a false, and it's false. Now, let's look at Hebrews 2, verse 7, since we don't really trust that Cooley guy to accurately cite it. What's that? Yeah, Psalm 2, verse 7. Whatever I said, obliterated on the tape.
I mean, I want to go further than to strike it from the tape. Scratch it from the record. Okay. Psalm 2, verse 7, I will tell of the decree, the Lord said to me, you are my son, today I have begotten you.
Which I think was pretty close to what I said. I just skipped all the first part. I will tell you of the decree, the Lord said to me, you are my son, today I have begotten you. Okay, so then Barrett says, some will object to the word today in Psalm 2, verse 7, and Hebrews 1, verse 5, must preclude the concept of eternal generation.
Or, he says, some will object that the word today in Psalm 2, verse 7, and Hebrews 1, verse 5, must preclude the concept of eternal generation, and instead refers only to the son being sent into the world, right?
Today I have begotten you. You have become Jesus in the flesh. You have become Jesus the man, in addition to being Jesus the God. Second person of the Trinity. Or, they say, being appointed to his office as king.
So Barrett says, unlike created angelic beings, Christ is a natural son, not an adopted son. A son from all eternity, not a son whose origin begins in time. As Augustine explains, the word today denotes the actual present, as in eternity.
Nothing is past, as if it had ceased to be, nor future, as if it had not yet come to pass. But all is simply present, since whatever is eternal is ever in being. The words today I have begotten you are to be understood of the divine generation.
So, when we read today I have begotten you, the idea would be that David, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is doing what? What's David doing? What's he listening to? Essentially, the eternal divine counsel, the Father and the Son speaking to one another.
But it's today I have begotten you, meaning what? Jesus came into being? No, as Augustine says, there's an eternal nature to this. And you think, well, that's kind of mind-boggling. Well, yes it is, but what is divine generation?
We've been talking about this. How do we grasp the fact that Jesus has his source in the Father, yet never has a starting point? In time, anyway, a temporal starting point. How do we get that? Okay, Jesus says, I and the Father are one.
Well, I was going to say, our problem becomes the temporal one, right? Because we want to understand everything with regard to time. But if, you know, I mean, this is an easy true or false. True or false, God existed before time existed.
Okay, how do we explain that? A silence fell over the room. We have to accept it. And we have to think about it this way. Time begins when? Okay, when God created everything. That's when time begins. Well, what happened before time?
I don't know. Well, I can tell you though, I can give you a one word answer. What happened before time? God. Okay, that's really, that's all there is. Brian, is that a hand or are you just combing your hair?
All right. Well, I didn't know. Sometimes, you know, there's like, so I used to do that all the time in calculus. On second thought, I have no idea what I was going to ask. So, well, what does subordination mean?
Is that what it means? Yeah, I mean, you and I are subordinated to the government of the United States, whether we want to be or not. Right? So does that mean we derive our being and existence from the government?
Well, I mean, here, okay, I think there's some basics here that we need to back up and just talk about for a second. And then we'll get back to the context of Hebrews. Some of it is going to become very clear in the next chapter.
We're going to hear Bruce Ware and we're going to hear Wayne Grudem say some pretty outlandish things, outlandish to me anyway. And it's in keeping with this idea of what you're saying, this subordination concept that if Jesus is derived from the father, he's necessarily less than.
Yeah. Okay. Well, actually, I mean, they get as close and we'll talk about it next week, maybe, or in the weeks to come, certainly. But they come as close to Arius as you can possibly get without being Arius.
I mean, I think there are some real, real problems. And, you know, basically, I think any time, and Bruce Ware does this explicitly, anytime you take the councils and creeds and you say, you know, forget those.
I have a new and better way of understanding things. You're doing worse than walking on thin ice. You've plunged through the ice. But let's go to the context of Hebrews 1. And starting at verse 3, he, of course, Jesus, is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his, the father's nature.
And he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high. Having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Okay. Now, when we see that Jesus becomes superior to the angels, what does that mean? Does that mean in his divine nature, he's somehow graduated to become greater than the angels that he created in the beginning of time?
Okay. Okay. For which, for to which of the angels did God ever say, you are my son. Today, I have begotten you. And of course, the answer is none of them. Or again, I will be to him a father. And he shall be to me a son.
And the answer is, of course, none of them. So what's his point? What's, what's that? Go ahead. Okay. He's the Messiah come from heaven. And he is preeminent over everything in his humanity. And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, let all God's angels worship him.
So this is before he does anything. All the angels should worship him. Why? Because he's a perfect baby. Because he's the eternal son. Of the angels, he says, he makes his angels winds and his ministers a flame of fire.
But of the sun, he says, your throne, oh God, is forever and ever. And again, this refers back to what? Your throne, oh God, is forever and ever. The scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom.
There's a quotation there. Where's that quotation from? I'm going to do like you do. And I'm going to look on the side here and see that it says cited from Psalm 45 verses six and seven. Well, what does that refer to?
Your throne, oh God, is forever and ever. The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore, God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.
Now, to me, when I read that, it pretty much sounds like the confessions. Jesus is eternally God. He's God of gods. God from God, I guess we could say, right? Therefore, God, your God, has anointed you.
I think this does speak of eternal generation. I think it does tell us that Jesus is God of gods, that he has the divine essence. It's not divided. It's not subtracted. But he is God of very God. Well, let me ask you a question.
When he was born in the flesh, was he the divine king? Was he fit to rule and reign when he was born? John said, in his human nature, no, he had to suffer first. I mean, if we just think about it this way, Jesus, baby, did he sin?
So what would prevent him from ascending to David's throne? And you say he had to suffer first, John. Well, I think he had to suffer first, but I think he had to suffer first for a different reason, not to be the king.
I mean, how disappointing would that be, right? To reign alone without a bride, to assume the throne of David and have no people. I mean, he's not just a king. He's the redeemer. He's the spotless lamb of God.
So in that sense, I think it would have been. But I mean, even, just a second, John. But, you know, even looking back at Hebrews, when he comes into the earth and he's born, writer of Hebrews says the angels should or did worship him.
So go ahead, John. Yes. Yes. But he's worthy. You know, in what way? I mean, it was always worthy. So, you know, what is it that they're in Revelation? What are they shouting about? And I think there's definitely truth there, too.
Right. We. He becomes greater than for a number of reasons. You know, could angels have ever done what he did? And the answer, of course, is no. Nobody could have done what he did. Yeah, well, it is. It very much is a proof that he is who he says he is, you know, et cetera.
But we're kind of getting going forest right here. So let's get back on track. Number today. Okay. Fifteen. True or false. That Jesus has always been the same means that he is eternally generated. Now, remember, every part of a question has to be true in order for the question to be true.
If any part of it is false, then it's all false. And also remember, the teacher exists only to trick you. Well, the answer is true. Jesus has always been that he's always been means the same or means that he is eternally generated.
Barrett says this. If this beginning in Hebrews one five is an eternal beginning, then perhaps it is right to paraphrase Psalm two seven. As one scholar has, quote, You are my son. Forever. I have begotten you.
Meaning, you know, instead of today, I have begotten you. Well, what does today mean? Is that what Augustine said? Basically, forever. After all, chapter later chapters in Hebrews will refer to Jesus himself as the one who is the same yesterday, today and forever.
That's Hebrews 13, eight. What does that mean? Means he never changed. So people say what that Jesus must have changed when he. Became a man or they must have changed. No. Hebrews doesn't quote Psalm two seven to say Jesus climbs up the divinity ladder as if he were of a lesser glory and must arrive at a more exalted position.
Hebrews quotes the psalmist to convey that the son's origin has always been from the father. He didn't become God. He was always God. I see that hand. Yes. Admitting. What does it mean to be first born?
I think we have to cover that first. OK, so I'm not sure I understand your point. In other words, it's fine if it is carnation incarnation. Does that mean I mean, I'm not saying that everything in here always refers to eternal generation.
Some of it can refer to the incarnation. That's fine. In fact, let's see what you are. My son brings in the world as the sun condescends to assume our human nature. Angels worship him. That's what the Reformation Study Bible says about one six.
So that's fine. Right. We don't have a problem with that. Other questions, concerns. Yes. Absolutely. We and we've talked about that before. I mean, if he's eternal father. What does that mean? I mean, again, this is a difficult concept for us.
How could he say or how could he have the title of father if there was a time when he was not a father? If there was a time when he did not have a son. And this is, you know, again, our minds just kind of buckle.
And why do they buckle? Because we want everything to start when we start. We don't want there to be anything before essentially. Genesis one. Because we don't have, you know, we don't have a Genesis zero or a Genesis negative three.
And so we do. We just we just want that. Right. Yeah. Why hasn't anybody ever tried to do that? Well, they probably have. I should butt my lip. The prequel to the Bible, you know, it probably does exist.
What's that? Yeah. New bestseller. What was God doing before he created the earth? OK. Number 16. True or false. That Jesus is the image of the father means that he is the creator or he the creator, as they say somewhere.
Not in very good English. That is true. He begins his letter to the Colossians by praising God for delivering us. Paul does. From the domain of darkness and transferring us to the kingdom of his beloved son.
Already that son or that phrase beloved son speaks volumes, meaning that this is God's beloved son. What it means for the son to be a son is conveyed next. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
For by him, all things were created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things.
And in him, all things hold together. Now, when we see that, there are a few things we need to understand. You know, like when the Jehovah's Witnesses come to your door and they say what? Well, sure. Jesus, as they like to call him, the Archangel Michael.
He's the firstborn of creation. And then he creates everything else. Well, there's a problem with that. And that problem is right there in Colossians 1. Because that would mean what? That the Archangel Michael had to create himself.
Because you can't create all things. If you're a thing, a created being, you can't create yourself. There's an inherent contradiction there. You know, and so, you know, they want to put an asterisk on that and say, well, actually, what happened is the father created the son and then the son created everything else.
That's not what the scripture tells us. Thoughts or concerns? OK, number 17. Adam was the image of God. Man, that probably might be the best trick question I've ever written. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Yes, very good, Lisa. There's no debating that the imago Dei, which is the image of God in Latin, is fundamental to what it means to be human. Unlike many secularists, Christians are set apart by this basic belief.
And let me just, I want to pause there for a moment. What are some of the implications that man and man alone is made in the image of God? If you just think worldview wise, what difference does it make?
OK, that animals are different. You know, every time, I don't know about you guys, but when I see, you know, these commercials on TV where they have dogs and cats and elephants and everything else being abused and hunted and killed and everything.
What do I think? I just shrug and go, they're not image bearers. No, it bothers me. But I don't think, oh, I want to write out a check. But when I see kids being, you know, abused and whatnot, well, that's what I want to get my checkbook out.
Right. Why? Because there is a difference. Dogs, as wonderful as they are, are not made in the image of God. Cats, as we know, are made in the image of Satan. So this. Sorry. Sorry for all the cat lovers.
But I will just say in my defense, dogs can't wait for you to get home. Cats can't wait for you to get weak. You know, they're looking for that moment when they can just. You are prey. It is murder. I mean, with certain caveats, you know, like in our in our law with malice of forethought, et cetera, et cetera.
But it is it is interesting. You know, I think what we're seeing. Let me just talk about worldview here and we'll we'll close here. If we look at worldviews and why I think this is so important. When things like, you know, small things.
Like pronouns. Are introduced. I take great offense. Why? Because they're attacking language. They're attacking ultimately Western civilization. They're they're attacking this Christian. Biblical worldview.
And you can go if you go throughout the world, there are places. And this is stunning because I sat in the leadership class one day when I was still in the sheriff's department. We had members from LAPD and other other groups.
We met for some. I think it was like the the introduction of CRT and stuff like that. But we met in this class and they were like, what are some universal values? Things that everybody agrees on, you know, and thou shalt not kill came up.
Well, that's false. That's false. There are cultures in the world today that teach it's OK to kill. It's fine. In fact, it's OK to eat your neighbor. It's OK. It's OK to. Have relations with young children.
In some places in the world. And so, you know, when I see things that are, you know, attacking the the family structure. All these kind of issues. Well, why is that? Because they want to push out this idea that there's a creator who set up a created order who has said this is the way man is.
This is the way man shall live. They want to do away with all that. Why? Because chaos is satanic. This whole idea that, you know, animals are important as people. Satanic. The idea that kids, young kids, can decide that they're another gender is satanic.
It's a massive lie. And it's designed to ultimately destroy not only our confidence in scripture, but our understanding of what it what who we are. I mean, I get, frankly, angry when I hear about kids going to school dressed as animals on it, not for Halloween or something like that, but on a daily basis.
Even heard this week that kids are a local high school have what's called in the administrative office a nest where they dress up like animals. And then if they feel, you know, down or whatever, during the course of the day, they all go pile into this nest where they can get comfort from one another.
Yes, high school. You know, hey, they're preparing them to go out and live in the world because you'll be. I mean, was the last time, you know, you're having a rough day at work. You just go, you know what, boss, I'm just going to go take a few minutes in the nest.
Wacky. But we're supposed to accept this as normal. We're supposed to believe that this is the way things are supposed to be. It's not the way things are supposed to be. We should be training our kids what?
To be men and women, men who leave their parents and cleave to their wives. This is what we're supposed to be training. Instead, we're teaching kids. It's okay. You're having a hard day. You know, dress up like a poodle and go to school.
Don't worry about things. Take these medications. Do this. It's crazy. It's insanity. Mankind is special. Not because we rule and reign over the world, which is true. I mean, you know, even if you let's just for a minute, a second, just talk about what evolution suggests.
Evolution suggests that by some stroke of luck, mankind wound up on top of the pyramid. Right? But that also means that other animals might catch up to us. And it also means, if you think about it logically, that cockroaches are just as important as you are.
So don't step on them. Don't put down acid to get rid of them. Embrace them. Those are your brothers and sisters. It's insanity. Absolute insanity. They don't have the image of God. They do not have a soul.
They are not going to answer before the king of the universe for what they did with the Lord Jesus Christ. We will. We must believe that he is our savior because he died for us. Not for dogs, cats, cows, cockroaches.
For us. Let's pray. Father, thank you for this morning. Thank you for this time to even contemplate these things that are really mind-boggling. When we start thinking about, well, what were you doing before the Bible starts?
We can't comprehend that. We want to. Why? Because we want to understand you fully. We want to be able to define you in terms that fit our worldview, that fit our abilities to understand things. Lord, help us to remind ourselves constantly, you are other.
You are not like us. You are a whole other category that we cannot fully grasp and will never fully grasp and that we'll spend all of eternity learning more about you. All of it. That's, again, beyond our kin, beyond our means.
Help us. We pray in Jesus' name. Amen.