A friend of mine has been caught up in a back and forth with an Adoptionist who follows the cult of William Marion Branham. Branham is an insidious figure, who supported many absurd and wicked doctrines. He rejected the Trinity and espoused an Adoptionist Unitarian position on the Godhead. Moreover he taught the wicked doctrine of serpent seed, the theory that the Devil had intercourse with Eve and the non-white people's of Earth are their descendants. A strong segregationist, he was baptized by a grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and associated with elements of Christian Identity. He was a known false prophet and made many predictions that never came to pass. The dialogue is less about Branham himself and the Adoptionist doctrines espoused by him. I am arguing for the Trinity from a Biblicist perspective rather than a Traditionalist one.
Tag: Biblicism
A Response to 3 Questions for Trinitarians asked by an Adoptionist
Modalist: “The Bible says that the Church is the Body of Christ and he is the head of the church . If there is One God in Three persons, it means that the Church of God has three husbands.”
Response: This ought to be one of the most absurd statements I have heard in my life but having read this entire document, I would say it is full of such absurd and ridiculous statements that have no basis in either Scriptures or credible sources of history. The Adoptionist plainly doesn’t comprehend simple Biblical truth. First of all, it is clear that the Adoptionist doesn’t understand analogy nor analogical language that is prevalent in Scripture.
Human Experience and the Sufficiency of Scripture
I've been watching a Great Courses series on the History of Christianity by Dr. Luke Timothy Johnson, a New Testament scholar, historian and distinguished professor at Emory University. He was formerly a Benedictine monk and Priest in the Romanist religion. While he is still strongly in the Romanist faith by profession, he is certainly a theological liberal (even while he rejects the term) and thus disagrees with several of their central dogmas. He supports homosexual unions, ordination of female clergy and opposes mandated clerical celibacy. I was curious to know the justification of his liberal views, so I read his essay defending his views on homosexual unions.
Natural Revelation and the Sufficiency of Scripture – Part 2
In my previous essay, I wrote about Natural Revelation and how it relates to the Special Revelation we receive through Scripture. Recently, while surveying various Reformed forums on social media, I came across some men who were claiming that General (Natural) Revelation is just as authoritative as Scripture and decrying those who reject their Natural Revelation claims as Nominalists. The basis for their claim was the Scriptural teaching that "all things hold together in Him" (Col 1:17). Since, they claim, all things hold together in Christ, what is revealed to us in Nature is just as authoritative as what is revealed to us in Holy Scripture. Prima Facie, this principle seems reasonable and in line with what the Text claims. However, a simple examination of the context of that very Text and its place in the whole of Scriptures would show why that is not just an error but a serious one.
Natural Revelation and the Sufficiency of Scripture
Recently there's been a surge of interest in Reformed circles on topics pertaining to Natural Law and Natural Revelation. Western Cultures in the 21st Century have seen a rapid erosion of traditional values leading to the formation of several reactionary political movements, like the Alt-Right and several other ethnically conscious movements that claim that the salvation of the West lies in returning to traditional European mores and practices. Reformed tradition is not exempt from the influence of these movements - both progressive and reactionary. Since the Magisterial Reformation didn't abandon the Dominionism of the Middle Ages, this tradition has continued in some form or the other within Protestantism leading to a long history of seeking power, influence and engaging in social activism. While all of these misguided attempts have consistently failed, from Geneva to Apartheid South Africa, the fascination with the notion of taking Dominion for Christ hasn't died.
Traditionalist Historical Metanarratives and the Sufficiency of Scripture
Historical Metanarratives are central to how we view history. They help us make sense of the past, find continuity with it and justify our beliefs, juxtaposed against the grand scheme of things. Hence different factions engage in much effort to defend their Metanarratives against those of their opponents. Christian traditions are not exempt from this reality and it is in the light of this that we see the recent factionalism in Christianity over various Metanarratives and sadly many Christian historians and theologians have engaged in the revisionism. On the one end you have the leftist revisionists who wish to read anachronistic frameworks into the past and "cancel" those with differing views based on present understandings of morality. Likewise, you have right wing revisionists who wish to either read the "good ole days" narrative or want to completely ignore serious issues and transgressions in major figures of the past, so as to bolster their ideal of Traditionalism and Elitism.
Deo Vicit Mundum 