Is the God of the Bible a Heptagon?

According to Sola Scriptura, arguably so. This brings to mind John Adams’ quote mocking the Trinity that according to such logic, God could be a Quaternity with the Virgin Mary the 4th Person in the Godhead.

There is a Sola Scripturaist named Monica Dennington who argues, according to the Bible, God is not Triune because the Bible mentions more than just three Persons in the Godhead, but Seven. And she indeed does have verse and chapter justification for her claim — The “seven spirits of God” written in Revelation 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; and 5:6.

She also mentions that God the Father had sex with the Holy Spirit to produce the Son. Therefore, unless we conclude God is a homosexual, the Holy Spirit must be female.

Every single claim she makes can be justified by citations to Scripture. I see no evidence she doesn’t really believe in her claims. And though not (apparently) “brilliant” — probably not as smart as John MacArthur or distinguished reformed theologians who occupy notable academic positions, she doesn’t seem stupid. In fact if given an IQ test, I’d be she’d test significantly higher than a typical church member of MacArthur’s Church, or the Roman Catholic Church or most churches.

The point of this is it supports my conclusions that Sola Scriptura without a top down interpretive authority is schizophrenic. Another way of saying this is I reject as utterly preposterous the notion that “any idiot” can just open the Bible and read it and see the traditional orthodox notions like original sin, Trinity, or whatever. No if you give any idiot or even any person with an above average IQ the Bible and have them open and read it, you can as easily get “Rev. Dennington’s” understanding of Scripture as Calvin’s or Wesley’s or the Roman Catholic Church’s.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Is the God of the Bible a Heptagon?

  1. Matty says:

    She also mentions that God the Father had sex with the Holy Spirit to produce the Son. Therefore, unless we conclude God is a homosexual, the Holy Spirit must be female.

    This suggests that a feminine holy spirit seems supportable on the grounds of semitic languages, while the idea of the Holy Spirit as Mother of God the Son is also not original.

  2. ppnl says:

    The point of this is it supports my conclusions that Sola Scriptura without a top down interpretive authority is schizophrenic.

    I agree and I think you can generalize this. For example Sola Star Trek:TOS cannot tell us all we think we know about the federation without a top down interpretive authority. Even when we add in Star Trek:TNG the details are still lacking and so we need a council of trekkies to interpret truth and protect us from perversion and blasphemy like that J. J. Abrams movie.

    Sorry, I’m being bad.

    The point is that religion is and always has been an ongoing act of creation.

  3. Brian says:

    This either proves that God supports whatever authority happens to have been in power first, or held power longest, or whatever one happens to currently be in power, or it proves that there is no way to know the truth. Now go ask your authority of preference if I’m right. 🙂

  4. lukas says:

    @Brian: it’s all guided by the Holy Spirit, duh.

  5. AMW says:

    Every single claim she makes can be justified by citations to Scripture.

    Making a word salad from a couple dozen passages isn’t what I’d call citing Scripture. I’d call it proof-texting, and it’s the stuff of hacks and youth pastors. But I repeat myself.

    …Sola Scriptura without a top down interpretive authority is schizophrenic.

    I would say Sola Scriptura is self-contradictory. Without interpretive authority every man is a Pope, and there’s little reason to rely on the Bible. But with an interpretive authority it’s not really Sola Scriptura anymore.

    I disagree that the authority must be “top down,” though.

  6. tom van dyke says:

    Making a word salad from a couple dozen passages isn’t what I’d call citing Scripture. I’d call it proof-texting, and it’s the stuff of hacks and youth pastors. But I repeat myself.

    Oh man, that’s funny. Especially the “hack” part.

    >>>>Sola Scriptura without a top down interpretive authority is schizophrenic.

    I would say Sola Scriptura is self-contradictory. Without interpretive authority every man is a Pope, and there’s little reason to rely on the Bible. But with an interpretive authority it’s not really Sola Scriptura anymore.

    This is the Protestant conundrum, in my view. I dunno if it extends to “little reason to rely on the Bible,” but yes, Protestantism makes every man a pope in interpreting it.

    [The correct concept behind popery is “magisterium,” the Holy Spirit guiding the church through the ages as Mr. Lukas rightfully observes. But AMW is close enough for rock’n’roll.]

    I have no dog in the fight, but in studying Protestantism, I ran across the reputed “co-founder” of Lutheranism, Philipp Melanchthon being unsurprised about Michael Servetus’ questioning of the Trinity itself as an inevitable consequence of the rejection of the Church’s magisterial authority. Servetus was burned, by most accounts with John Calvin’s approval [although Calvin favored the headsman as more merciful].

    As it turned out, the irony is that Calvin and especially Luther remained more “Catholic” in what they retained from Roman Catholicism than in what later Protestants would end up rejecting. They’d probably rather have kissed the pope’s ring than set foot into one of today’s “mainline” Protestant churches, let alone the wiggier ones like Monica’s, to which they probably would have put the first torch.

  7. Dutch says:

    I would express a stronger emphasis is laid upon the Scriptures speaking for Itself when it comes to the phrase Sola Scriptura. It’s God’s Self-Attesting Word. There’s no doubt that Sanctification takes time and Christianity is a life transforming Spirit, and we are called to surrender ourselves to the Word, maturing verse by verse, line by line, day by day. Furthermore, speaking apologetically, the argument for the existence of God is identical to the argument over the veracity of the Scriptures. You can’t argue for One without the Other.

    Peace

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s