Meredith G. Kline and the Trinity, Christology, and Pneumatology: A Thread
(h/t to my @OFADpodcast co-host Caleb Castro for sourcing this, though he is not on Twitter and won't see this, probably) 1/10
In 2006, Meredith Kline published God, Heaven, and Har Magedon, his last book before his death about a year later. GHHM has already appeared in this series as it was where Kline most clearly articulated his doctrine of the Sabbath, against the Westminster Standards. 2/10
In chapter 2 of GHHM, Kline posits his doctrine of Endoxation, wherein the Holy Spirit is said to undergo a permanent change in taking on a created form, something akin to the Son's incarnation. (quotes from pp. 13-17) 3/10
This also, by the way, is a particular example of how Kline's writing style is just...unusual. If you're having trouble reading those quotes and tracking with what is being said, you would not be the first. Yet it is in what is clearly stated that trouble can be found 4/10
The best that could be said about this idea of Endoxation is that it is novel and speculative. I cannot find another theologian who uses it. But the real trouble is where this seems to lead Kline next. 5/10
Kline argued on pages 15 and 16 of GHHM that this Endoxation of the Spirit is prior to the Incarnation of the Son, and that "It is a desideratum," (i.e. it is needed or wanted) that the creeds and confessions should be amended to say... 6/10
...that the Son is not merely eternally begotten of the Father, but also *eternally* begotten (filiated) of the Holy Spirit--in some instances reversing the order of the Persons. 7/10
It seems that Kline is trying to push the economical relations between the Persons observed in the Incarnation (the conception of Christ by the power of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit resting on/empowering/anointing Christ, and the Transfiguration) back into eternity. 8/10
In my mind, this sounds similar methodologically to the error of EFS/ESS/ERAS, in which the Son's submission to the Father in the Incarnation (economic submission) is read back into eternity and into the ontology (being) of God. 9/10
Now remember, Kline's trade was as an Old Testament scholar and biblical theologian. This is what he is remembered and praised for. Yet here he is very clearly wading deep into the waters of systematic/dogmatic theology and proposing revisions to the ecumenical faith. 10/10
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It is here that some of my former fellow Escondidans might jump in and say "But it's a Venn diagram! They overlap! VanDrunen's book even has it on the cover!" But while that overlap is claimed, the political is thought about/talked about in an almost exclusively negative way. 1/
In this camp, the church is what matters, the political doesn't. So even if someone from the camp happens to be politically positioned and active, they're more or less expected to do so in a disinterested fashion, primarily preserving the American status quo. 2/
Basically, just do whatever it takes to keep politics separate from us. The moment any political activity starts to look assertive in a pro-Christian direction, the hand-wringing begins about kingdom confusion, theology of glory, eschatological expectations, etc. 3/
You will see a lot of Meredith Kline sympathizers mine quotes from historic Reformed sources about things like the Covenant of Works. Going back to the sources is certainly good, but if we're going to do that, we need to go all the way back.
You certainly can find forms of republication in the tradition. However, it's not enough to say, "republication exists therefore Kline vindicated." One must look deeper, not only into the context of quotes but into doctrines that are prior to particular covenantal formulations.
How does the tradition speak about things like grace, works, law, and merit? In the thread I quoted above, it becomes clear that Reformed theology had a rather unified and unanimous understanding of merit that Kline did not follow (compare the quotes above to this: )meredithkline.com/klines-works/a…
So it seems Peter Bell is gearing up to release something Wednesday to prove he didn't misrepresent his licensure to churches. I don't see what exactly this accomplishes.
1. The major misrepresentation was not that Bell was a licentiate, but that he was a pastor. This misrepresentation was published for over a year by GGG. We determined in our investigation that Bell no longer had valid licensure, but that was secondary.
2. We never alleged that Bell was misrepresenting his licensure to churches. We noted a couple of details in our ecclesiastical letter like the incomplete MIF and some believing he was licensed in the RPCNA simply to outline the trail we followed and difficulty we had.
We confirmed with the Presbytery of Southern California (OPC) that Bell was not licensed to preach or approved as a stated supply. One minister said they had plans to ask the PSC to take Bell under care (a step before licensure) but to our knowledge this never occurred.
I confirmed with an elder at Oceanside URC that Bell was no longer licensed or a member there. This was doubly confirmed by friends who have access to the URCNA licensed exhorter list--Bell was not on it. Licensure expires, he either gave his up or didn't maintain it.
I also corresponded with bodies in the PCA and RPCNA, as Bell served as supply in the RPCNA for a time and my contacts in the RPCNA told me he left the RPCNA to pursue opportunities in the PCA. Still no licensure any of those places. I have all of this documentation.
A trailer for SOP released today that names many contributors to the project. Among them are many egalitarians (like Du Mez and Barr), slanderers of the brethren (Moore), proponents of CRT (Anyabwile), and various confessional P&R ministers. (2/10)
My question is Paul’s from 2 Corinthians 6:14: “What fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?” (3/10)
I'm going to do a living thread of various Reformed and Reformed-adjacent ministries that took federal COVID bailout money through the Paycheck Protection Plan.
I did a piece on Reformed seminaries doing this about a year ago. Rather than duplicate those efforts, here you go. 1/onceforalldelivered.com/publish/posts/…
The Gospel Coalition took funds two times, totaling just under $800K. No big surprise there. 2/