Trending
How is Jesus fully God and fully man, yet one person? This is the question Wayne Grudem attempts to answer in Chapter 26 of his "Systematic Theology" book. "Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine" is widely recognized as the bestselling and most frequently assigned modern textbook in evangelical and protestant seminaries globally.
Grudem starts with a premise that is nowhere to be found in the Bible, "fully God and fully man." Then, he goes to the Bible for proof. The phrase “fully God and fully man” does not come from the Bible. It originated from the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD.
This seems backwards to me. Why not start with a quote from scripture, then study scripture to come to a biblical understanding. Why not start with the premise that Jesus is the "Son of God and Son of Man" and then allow all of scripture to define and interpret the meaning?
It saddens me to think that God did such a poor job of explaining himself in Scripture, that centuries later he needed men to come up with terminology and doctrines that are not in the Bible to define who He is. Not only that, many (like Dr Paul Tambrino) conclude that God is an incomprehensible mystery and that is what we are to believe. Even Wayne Grudem concludes that "fully God and fully man" "will remain for eternity … .the most profound mystery in all the universe." Now, is that statement truth or tradition?
Confirmation bias is the psychological tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms our preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. It is a cognitive shortcut -- an involuntary filter our brain uses to handle information. It causes us to notice facts that support our opinions while completely ignoring or downplaying facts that contradict them.
If we only look for evidence that backs up our view and if we interpret ambiguous passages as support for what we believe, two people can read the same passage of scripture and come to conclusions that contradict each other. We end up with division where God calls for unity.
One of the goals of this article "Bible Truth or Tradition," is to allow scripture to speak for itself. We can all read it for ourselves and if we can put off some "confirmation bias" and allow scripture to speak for itself, we can rightly divide the word of truth and come to a biblical understanding of who God is and who Jesus is. When I say a biblical understanding, I mean using biblical language, not terminology that came from fourth century and later church councils and creeds like Wayne Grudem used in his "Systematic Theology" book.
The following is a partial list of these terms that are not in the Bible: Trinity, three persons, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, one essence, one nature, the same substance, fully God, fully man, two natures, God in the flesh, God-man, hypostatic union, and incarnation.
Is it acceptable to use non-biblical terminology? If those terms are definable and accurately represent biblical teaching there should be no problem. So, the question is whether the doctrine behind the terms comes from Scripture or from later theological development?
Mark Rohde can be reached at marklrohde@icloud.com.