The Forgotten Christ 06

The final main session of the Affinity Study Conference at High Leigh was this morning. The evening before we had a good time of prayer together. I then got talking to fellow blogger Martin Downes and a very thoughtful fellow from Cardiff about the law and Christians and entertainment, etc. It was quite late by the time I hit the hay. Fellowship with friends old and new is part of the deal.
For some reason the name of Greg Beale from Wheaton College near Chicago had been below my radar. 'Haven't you seen his books on Revelation and the Temple?' everyone said to me. Ah well.

Anyway his paper was inevitably on Christ in Revelation. Perhaps unfortunately he chose to focus on just a few texts. His headings: 1. Christ is the divine genuine and true witness of his resurrection and the new creation (Re 1:5, 3:14 cf Is 65:16, 17) 2. Christ also presents himself as true end-time Israel, who is a true and faithful witness of his resurrection as the beginning of the new creation (Re 3:14, cf Is 43) 3. The first rhetorical purpose of using Isaiah in the letter to Laodicea 4. The second rhetorical use ... An appendix looked at Re 17:14b against Da 4:37.

In his presentation Dr Beale chose to focus on the broader issue of dealing with OT quotations in the NT and some even broader NT hermeneutical presuppositions. The discussion time strayed far and wide also. This was all very interesting but it did not provide what I guess was intended to be the climax to a conference on The Forgotten Christ. Ironically, Christ himself whom we had focused on most intently, especially in the second and third sessions and those that followed, earlier on, was beginning to be pushed into the background again. That may well be too harsh but there was certainly that danger.

The Forgotten Christ 05

After our jam-packed morning on our second day at High Leigh the afternoon was left free before our fifth session started at 5 pm.

In contrast to the previous young speaker we were in the hands this time of veteran Westminster Theological Seminary professor Dick Gaffin. He has been a professor at WTS for over 40 years. The session was chaired by former student Mark Johnston. The paper was on The last Adam and the life giving spirit

Uniquely this paper focused on just one text 1 Cor 15:45. After very careful exegesis seeking to establish that the contrast is between pre-fall Adam and Christ and that the word Spirit does refer to the Holy Spirit (the view of Vos, Bavinck and Murray but not all writers) Dr G drew three practical conclusions - 1. In his inner core the believer will never be more resurrected than he is now 2. Charismatics and non-charismatics should be helped to see that it is the fruit of the Spirit rather than his gifts that are the important thing 3. Emphasis was laid on the Christian's suffering - a prelude to eschatological resurrection.

Probably because of the nature of the paper discussion in groups was more difficult to sustain but some interesting further contributions were later made by Dr Gaffin.

The Forgotten Christ 04

The fourth session followed on from the third and was chaired by retired minister Paul Brown, now based in Lancaster. (The poor chap due to do it had gone down with 'flu').

The paper, on Christ’s ascension and heavenly ministry, was presented by the youthful Matthew Sleeman of Oak Hill Theological College, London. Matthew is a New Testament teacher. He also trained as a geographer and this factor informed his approach to the subject of the ascension. His PhD was on the Book of Acts and so that shaped the paper too, though references were also made to Hebrews and other NT books. His argument from Acts was that the heavenly location of Christ is more important than is usually thought to be the case. The group discussions helped us to think things through a little more, especially so as Matthew was in our group. It was good to get to know someone from a quite different background a little. It is certainly too easy to fail to focus on Jesus’s present location in heaven and what that means as the paper demonstrated. Somewhere along the line attention was drawn to the phrase Your Master in heaven in Ephesians 6 and the full significance of that term began to dawn. Another group reported back to say that at communion we must argue for a physical absence but not a spiritual one and felt that this point was sharpened by the insights gained from the paper.

The Forgotten Christ 03

The second day of the conference at High Leigh dawned bright and after a good breakfast we began the third session, under the chairmanship of LTS Principal elect Robert Strivens. Paul Wells, a French speaking Liverpudlian from the Theological Seminary in Aix-en-Provence’s paper was on Christ’s cry of dereliction. (Dr Wells is the author of a paperback in English on the atonement called Cross words).

This fascinating paper explored many aspects of the subject, placing the fourth word in the context of the others. It passed on an interesting suggestion that Psalm 22 is worked out on the cross but in reverse order to the way it appears there so that Christ’s cry comes later whereas this is where David begins. In the presentation it came out particularly clearly that Christ’s mediatorship is encapsulated in the fourth word as mediatorship involves not only relationship but isolation too.

When we split into groups we were able to look at the subject in further depth. It became clear that if we do not begin with the penal substitutionary atonement view of the cross we will downplay the fourth word. Beginning with a victory theology it is very difficult to find a place for that word. His forsakenness is a mystery but perhaps we can distinguish between the loss of the sense of communion and loss of the presence of God. Although Christ could not have literally gone to hell, there is a sense in which he ‘descended into hell’ on the cross.

If the incarnation is mind boggling how much more his cry of abandonment.

The Forgotten Christ 02

Jonathan Stephen stood in as chairman for Stephen Clark in the second session, held in the early evening of the first day. Philip Eveson (LTS) spoke on The inner or psychological life of Christ. This fascinating subject really stimulated our thinking. The paper began with some ground work on the one person and two natures, more on the communicatio, the wills of Christ, kenosis, enhypostasia (!) and the matter of Christ’s self-consciousness. Most interestingly Mr E argued for taking Owen’s view that it was the Spirit who enabled Christ to do what he did rather than accepting any idea of communication between the Christ's natures. The second part of the paper looked at the fascinating subjects of Christ’s mental, moral, emotional and spiritual development.
Our group was asked how a clearer appreciation of Jesus’ human development and psychological life can help us. I reported on our 8 suggestions –
1. Assures of God’s sympathy 2. Gives an example of Scripture study and application 3. Of use to children and others 4. And people undergoing change 5. Urges us to take up our cross 6. Reminds us to pray and work 7. Reminds us that even a perfect man gets tired, hungry, disappointed, etc 8. Stirs to worship.
Other groups looked, among other things, at Grudem’s idea of interpenetration in Christ’s natures (many wanted to reject this); at God’s impassability; at Christ’s impeccability; at fear legitimate and illegitimate; at Christ’s vulnerability; at the difference between fallibility and finitude.

We were free after the evening meal and a very good first day.

The Forgotten Christ 01

The first session on the first day of the Affinity Study Conference followed lunch and was chaired by the currently ubiquitous Bob Letham, newly recruited to ETCW. The speaker was Andrew McGowan, Principal of Highland Theological College. His brief was to set the scene with a largely historical paper on Chalcedon and beyond.

His paper covered the Christology of Chalcedon, beginning before Nicaea and bringing us down to the Council of Chalcedon in 451, followed by biblical teaching showing Chalcedon to be sound. He then looked at 'Post-enlightenment Christology' looking at Liberal theology (Christology from below) and Barthianism (Christology from above). 'The theological significance of Chalcedon', looking at the person of the logos, the communio (and communicatio) idiomatum and the Last Adam. He concluded that we should accept Chalcedon but say why we do. Perhaps we can find better ways of expressing these truths.
Our group was given the question of what are the most effective ways of affirming Christ’s uniqueness as God and man in a pluralistic society. We found it difficult to resolve the need to take a stand on important issues yet keep the teaching about Christ central.
Other groups reported back on Chalcedon's significance for setting out parameters and showing we're not ‘Johnny come latelys’. Chalcedon is part of our narrative. It is true to the Bible but inevitably bound by its context. The need for an evangelical doctrine of ‘tradition’ was accepted. Liberalism is still alive in many ‘churches’ though less so in Affinity ones. We can learn from men like Barth (as suggested) but need to take care. The hypostatic union has relevance to theology (no Mediator otherwise) pastoralia (Nestorianism still exists) and evangelism.

Affinity Study Conference

Some 80 people gathered at High Leigh Conference Centre, Hoddesdon, Herts, just north of London this week for a three day conference on The forgotten Christ. The conference is organised by Affinity (formerly BEC, see website here). I travelled up with retired Baptist minister Joseph Hewitt and Philip Eveson, Principal of London Theological Seminary and one of the speakers. Mr E was on his first drive out since radical surgery for prostate cancer. I'd have driven myself but didn't have access to the car. My assistant travelled from elsewhere. We arrived in good time and over lunch I began to get to know some from the half of the conference I didn’t recognise. I chatted to two fellows involved in the Crowded House project in Sheffield and Loughborough – two men I guess I probably wouldn’t have got chatting to anywhere else I go.
Jonathan Stephen (now ETCW Principal - a day for principals clearly) kicked off with a welcome and intro. Stephen Clark, Bridgend, planned the conference but was unable to be there. The six papers had been distributed beforehand so the speakers were required only to spend half an hour introducing them. The pattern was for them to make their presentation when 10 minutes for questions of clarification followed. We then split into groups of 10 to answer written questions arising from the papers. The groups then reported back with a short time to discuss the question from the floor. Reports to follow.