Monday, December 31, 2007

Trinitarian theology and the offence of God's passion for his glory

Dan Hames has contributed to a recent flurry of blog posts about Christian Hedonism (see Dave Bish's post). Dan Hames observes that there is "a massive question over all of Piper's work (and the work of others in this vein) in the minds of many people" and that is how we can "rescue God's concern for His own glory from narcissism". Dan Hames thinks the best defence in John Piper's armoury is Trinitarian theology. However I'm less than convinced. The main reason for my doubt is that I'm not sure that Dan Hames' Trinitarian theology is John Piper's Trinitarian theology. To my poorly educated ears Dan Hames' Trinitarian theology seems quite idiosyncratic [UPDATE: probably a poor choice of word] in a similar way to the way Mike Reeves talks on the Trinity seemed when I listened to them (although I thoroughly enjoyed them).

My concerns about the way Mike Reeves and Dan Hames articulate their Trinitarian theology is that:

  1. It downplays the unity of God to such an extent that I am unclear whether the unity of the Trinity is solely in their 'thoughts' (of love for each other, of their shared purposes etc).
  2. It seems that for them there is no 'priority' within their relationships although there are differences. I know subordination (whether eternal, economic, ontological or functional [!]) within the Trinity is a contested subject but I think it is there in the NT, and I think John Piper agrees.

If the Trinity is of 'one substance' (and I know Mike Reeves doesn't like that term for good reasons) and there is some kind of subordination, or even differing origins, within the Trinity, then I think that Trinitarian theology does little to remove the offence of God's passion for his glory. Although undoubtedly Trinitarian theology demonstrates the love of God and makes God's passion for his glory beautiful, God's concern is still totally self-centred because God is one, and because all the mutual glorification is asymmetric and seems to find rest in the glory of the Father that the Son and Spirit reflect and share.

I haven't the stamina to produce one well-written post on this subject so will probably just throw together a few posts full of quotes over the next few days which will hopefully provide some resources to think about subordination within the Trinity in the bible and in John Piper.

UPDATE: Dan Hames has responded to this post here. Well worth reading.

3 comments:

Daniel Hames said...

Dave,

Thanks so much for this.

I was going to reply with a comment, but it's getting quite long- so I think I'll turn it into a post over the next day or so.

Hope that's ok!

Dan

Daniel Hames said...

I did it- slightly faster than I thought.

http://danhames.blogspot.com/2008/01/trinitarian-theology-unity-and.html

Dan

Dave K said...

Thanks for the reply. I've read it and commented on it on your own blog now.

It was definitely worth making a post rather than leaving it buried in my comments where no-one would ever read it.