God did it. Have I missed something? Gordon Cheng

The only possible solution that I can think of here is that every single work of God in creation, and so, necessarily, in redemption, is at one and the same time the work of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

My first thought was, “Did God the Father hang on a Roman Cross?”

Traditionally the church Fathers used a fancy Latin phrase for this very idea - Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa - which means the external works of the Trinity are undivided. So the one God creates and redeems because there is no clash of wills between the persons. Now at any one point in the Scriptures one person in the Godhead may more obviously take the focus of the author’s attention. This doesn’t mean that the other two are on the bench. There is a complementary notion of appropriation which refers to “appropriating or assigning” a particular aspect of God’s actions in the Bible story to one particular person in the Godhead. So you may have read something like, the Father creates, the Son redeems and the Spirit sanctifies. This is the more problematic version of appropriation in that, obviously either it doesn’t matter which of the persons we refer to as they are all the same or that in certain situations, only one person of the Triune God is in action because the other two have not been specifically mentioned. Hence theologians like John Calvin described the idea of appropriating different aspects of God’s actions in creation to the different persons. So in the Institutes we read:
“Nevertheless, it is not fitting to suppress the distinction that we observe to be expressed in Scripture. It is this: to the Father is attributed the beginning of activity, and the fountain and wellspring of all things; to the Son, wisdom, counsel, and the ordered disposition of all things; but to the Spirit is assigned the power and efficacy of that activity.” I.13.18

What Calvin means here is that God the Father works in the world through His Son and by His Spirit.

Hi Craig,

No, God the Father didn’t die on the cross.

But God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. And, it was the will of God the Father that the Jesus should die.

So in both these senses, and possibly others I haven’t thought of just now, God the Father was fully involved in the redeeming work of Jesus on the cross.

David: way cool!

Roger Gallagher31/05/2009 12:22 PM

Hi Gordon,

A pike was basically a big spear between 3 to 6 metres in length. A pikestaff was the pike without the metal pointy bit on the end.

They were popular with the ancient Macedonians, until the Romans worked out ways to get around their formations. It was then revived in the Middle Ages, and was especially popular in the 16th century. It fell out of popularity as guns became more powerful and accurate.

I suspect the origin of the expression “as plain as a pikestaff” came from the fact that the pike was a weapon of the peasant & mercenary, who didn’t have the money to bling up their weapon as aristocrats could.

Without wanting to disagree with anything already said here, it might also be worth noting that the separation and loneliness of the second person (I know, myriad issues) on the cross might itself be important - not simply because of what it does for us – but because of what he himself becomes in relation to us by it.
The Father in sending the Son *away* ensures that he will achieve his inheritance and be glorified in his own right.

Gordon, I would suspect there is a much easier “solution” [not that I see this as a problem in any event] than what you mention.

I think you have fallen prey to the tendency to read things too much in terms of trinitarian categories and found by doing so a conundrum that does not exist.

When we read in our English translations that the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters and then ascribe an understanding of the word “Spirit of God” that is common in modern dialog but would have had no place whatever to the audience of the Torah, we are simply asking for interpretive problems.

What does Genesis 1:2 say is hovering over the surface of the waters? The ruwach of God.

What is this ruwach of God in the Genesis story? It is most definitely not the “Holy Spirit” of the Trinity, for this ruwach is what gives people life [Genesis 6:3] and when we are told that people will not live forever, it is because the ruwach will not “strive with man forever” [Genesis 6:3].

Since the Holy Spirit could not be received until after Christ’s cleansing death [Hebrews 9:14-17] yet man had this ruwach from the beginning.

In the Jewish conception of life, the “Breath of God” (translated by many English Translations as “Spirit of God,”) is what animated life and caused animals to be alive [see Genesis 6:3,17], and it is this life-giving breath that we see in Genesis 1:2, ready to inhabit all creation, animating all flesh.

Note the parallel of the “Breath of God” hovering over the waters in 1:2 right before Creation and God causing a breath [same word] to pass over the flooded earth in Genesis 8:1 to begin the second major covenantal epoch. And then this same word blew again in Exodus 14:21 preparing the Red sea parting immediately before the third covenantal epoch.

Commenting rules

If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:

  1. Please use your FULL NAME (your real name, not an alias).
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Be godly.

Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.

If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.

Your Comment

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Faith: It’s always been a matter of trust

Sponsors

Placeholder

Recent comments

RSS logo

Jean Williams on 10 in 2

Jean Williams on 10 in 2

Jean Williams on 10 in 2

Ben Pfahlert on 10 in 2

Nathan on 10 in 2

Current discussions

RSS logo

10 in 2 (6 comments)

Top 10 Tips for Sleep Deprived Prayer (4 comments)

Taking ‘crazy’ one step closer to ‘can do’ (2 comments)

Stress-throwers and stress-absorbers (0 comments)

Recent posts

RSS logo RSS logo

10 in 2 by Ben Pfahlert (6 comments). In January 2010 I set myself a goal that has transformed my diary, my thinking, my reading and the … more

Taking ‘crazy’ one step closer to ‘can do’ by Guest blogger (2 comments). Guest blogger Mikey Lynch, one of the directors of The Geneva Push, talks about the network's approach to … more

Top 10 Tips for Sleep Deprived Prayer by Jennie Baddeley (4 comments). There are so many reasons for losing sleep it's not really worth listing them. You're either getting enough sleep or you're … more

Stress-throwers and stress-absorbers by Jean Williams (0 comments). Are you a stress-thrower or a stress-absorber? A stress-thrower blames things on others and expresses stress in anger; a … more

‘Missional Lifestyle’: Education by Nicole Starling (11 comments). This is the fifth in Nicole's series on ‘missional lifestyle’. Read parts 1, 2, 3 … more

Why do we pray for others? by Scott Newling (1 comment). Learning to pray for others is one of the first things we learn as Christians: we see it commended … more

Forgiveness and repentance (part 8): Does God only forgive us when we repent? (ii) by Mark Baddeley (17 comments). (Read parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.) Does … more

The power of example by Peter Sholl (3 comments). Mexico in the 1940s was a country trying to come to grips with the 20th century. While discoveries of oil and … more

Forgiveness and repentance (part 7): Does God only forgive us when we repent? (i) by Mark Baddeley (29 comments). (Read parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.) We have been … more

The gospel to Greeks by Karen Beilharz (0 comments). For the past three Saturdays, we've been looking at contributions to the old Briefing ‘People in Ministry’ column, … more

Ministry partners