Having completed my main review of the New Testament (and some Old Testament) texts, cataloguing almost 500 passages, I am "celebrating" that milestone by publishing a part of the paper that helps me in the processing and weighing of these texts, which is currently entitled Chapter 2: Key Notions Defined. It also is an opportunity for me to tidy up these definitions.
Here is the next one.
Here is the next one.
Deity
I have had an increasing sense of wariness about the confusion hanging over this word, which is why it will not feature strongly in this paper. Deity has come to be used like a measuring tape of the degree of heresy and damage you might be capable of wielding on the belief of an individual or even of a church. How much deity does Jesus have? Seven? Fourteen? If we use expressions like “fully divine” or “full deity”, what would it mean to say “partially divine” or “partial deity”?
Dale Tuggy voices a similar complaint here commenting on the
sacking of a World Vision employee over the issue of the Trinity:
The words in their doctrinal statement […] fail to
clearly express any precise views about God and Jesus. It seems
to me that a lot of evangelical talk of the “deity of Christ” (or him “being
God” or “being fully God” or “100% God” etc.)
functions primarily as a sort of shibboleth,
and that’s what is going on here. Their statement also owes something to a
distinctively American anti-creedal tradition, which goes back to the founding
of [the United States of America…t]he result is a distinctive sort of Christian
tradition zealous to police itself for correct beliefs, but without interest in
making precise distinctions.[1]
More and more, I feel that the word deity does not really reflect anything we can find in the
Scriptures regarding God (except one single verse, Colossians 2:9, which I will
not be examining) in the way we use the word. It also places major question
marks over the roots of Fourth Century Trinitarianism itself, for the second
and third centuries are full of church fathers and writers who would not have
professed the “full deity of Christ” in the sense understood one or two
centuries later.
The term deity also – in my view – is now spoiled with a
misunderstanding of what we now define as monotheism, please see below.
Finally, deity
does not even reflect what the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed actually states
(or the church movement behind it) in the fourth century. Take the legendary
Athanasius for instance, who strategically made the otherwise inconsequential
Arius into a heresiarch. This is the same Athanasius who is famous for being
such a strong proponent of salvation as
deification: Jesus became man, so that men could become gods,
deified. There was arguably no-one more central to the creed most churches hold
so dearly to today. See “God” for more on the evolution of the word “theos” in
antiquity.
[1]
See full article No Trinity, No Job – Part 2, http://trinities.org/blog/no-trinity-no-job-%E2%80%93-part-2-dale/
[1]
See full article No Trinity, No Job – Part 2, http://trinities.org/blog/no-trinity-no-job-%E2%80%93-part-2-dale/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks very much for your feedback, really appreciate the interaction.