Godology, An Awful Book

Status
Not open for further replies.

kevin.carroll

Puritan Board Junior
Kevin, I do want to ask you a question: what do you mean by metaphors being "modalistic language"? Normally we think of metaphors as multiplicitous language, being able to convey multiple meanings. So, I would like to know what you mean by that.

As you know, modalism is an anti-Trinitarian heresy that denies that there are three persons in the God head. Rather, the one God reveals himself in three different modes, sort of like a single actor playing multiple parts in a play.

An orthodox view of the Trinity is that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God. They are the same in substance, equal in power in glory. One God. Three persons. The Father is not the Son or the Spirit. The Son is not the Father or the Spirit. The Spirit is not the Father or the Son. Yet there is one God.

Back to George:

"Like a three-way mirror, each person in the Godhead satellites the other--an eternal reflection." (p.18)

A reflection? A reflection is not the thing reflected, so does this mean that the members of the Trinity are simply emmanations of the one God? Sounds like modalism to me.

"Like the Irish three-leafed clover...Like a mind, God is intellect, memory, and will--one system, but three functions. Like water, God is fluid, steam, and icicle--one substance, but three textures." (p. 19)

The leaves of the clover, do not constitute the clover. The analogy fails, because the Son is not like the leaf of a clover, he is God. George evidently also does not understand that the works of the Godhead, while distinct in who executes them, are nonetheless the works of the one God. The last (awful) simile gets it really wrong and screams modalism again. Three textures? Each member of the Trinity is God in all his fullness, not a "texture" of God.

"And then God spoke...From the same throat came three chords--Father, Son, and Spirit--a holy harmonic." (p. 39)

So hear, three voices emmanate from one throat. Can you not see the modalism? It's awful, it's sloppy, it's heretical. It's blasphemous.
 

PMBrooks

Puritan Board Freshman
Kevin,
Totally agree with you! Thanks for explaining...I thought you were meaning that metaphors were modalistic, but I now see you were talking George's metaphors concerning the Trinity communicate that the Trinity is modalistic.

I teach in my classes that ALL human analogies of the Trinity fail because the Trinity is something we have to accept as a paradox (something not contradictory but something that appears contradictory to us with our finite minds). We simply have to acknowledge 3 in 1 and 1 in 3.

I might email Christian and ask how he would respond to these questions.
 

AThornquist

Puritan Board Doctor
Wow. Your quotations made me gasp out loud on several occasions. It's so troubling when people diminish the glory of God in such ways. However to this quote:

"Meditation makes the mundane things of life magical. ... ...Isolate a single object...wrap your mind around it. Engage it, observe it, apply it. Encounter it with your senses...lick it if you have to." (pp. 109-110)

I wonder if Mr. George has been meditating on toads. Maybe not.


I nearly spit my drink onto my keyboard :eek: Your remark was just too funny. I immediately understood it to mean that his opinions were so strange that he might have been licking psychoactive toads. Was my interpretation correct?
 

kevin.carroll

Puritan Board Junior
I nearly spit my drink onto my keyboard :eek: Your remark was just too funny. I immediately understood it to mean that his opinions were so strange that he might have been licking psychoactive toads. Was my interpretation correct?

Ribbit, ribbit. You are correct.
 

kevin.carroll

Puritan Board Junior
-Christian tries to think like a conservative Christian, but expresses things in a postmodern way. Can this be done? To a great extent I think it is hard, however, he tries. He did speak at our church plant which has a number of young, postmodern students, and they enjoyed his "metaphors" a great deal.

I mean no insult, but you act like George is the first person to speak to a pagan audience who does not buy our presuppositions.

Did Paul describe God as a hot dog on Mars Hill? No, he preached the gospel using biblical terminology.

Did the Reformers embrace the God is a hot dog vernacular to their generation? No, they preached the gospel using the language of the Bible.

Trust me, "God is a hot dog" does nothing to point people to Jesus, no matter how much that we of speaking may entertain the audience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top