Barrett on the Simplicity of God

The perfections of God are not like a pie, as if we sliced up the pie into different pieces, love being 10 percent, holiness 15 percent, omnipotence 7 percent, and so on. Unfortunately, this is how many Christians talk about God today, as if love, holiness, and omnipotence were all different parts of God, God being evenly divided among his various attributes. Some even go further, believing some attributes to be more important than others. This happens most with divine love, which some say is the most important attribute (the biggest piece of the pie).

-Matthew Barrett, None Greater: The Undomesticated Attributes of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2019), 72–73.

Ask yourself that question that often entertained the brightest minds of the late medieval era: Is something good because God wills it to be good, or does God will something because it is good? This famous conundrum is the ultimate puzzle, situating God between a rock and a hard place. If we say something is good because God wills it to be good, then God sounds arbitrary. Nothing is inherently good, but God simply decides what he wants to be good. On the other hand, if God wills something because it is good, then is God not subservient to whatever is good? A standard of goodness exists external to God himself.

The paradox is far less problematic if we take into consideration divine simplicity. How so? “God neither obeys the moral order, nor does He invent it,” says Katherin Rogers. “He is Goodness Itself, and all else that is good is good in imitation of God’s nature.” The same applies to other perfections. Is something true because God says it is true, or does God declare something true because it is true? The question betrays God’s simplicity. God does not bow to some external norm for truth, nor does he invent truth ex nihilo. God is truthfulness itself. All truth is truth because it mimics the very nature of God, who is truth.

Each example should buffet any reversal of the Creator-creature distinction. If God is a simple God, then he is his perfections eternally. Any sign of his perfections in the created order finds its origin in God. As “absolute source God is indeed Wisdom and Justice and Goodness per se, and other things possess these qualities through participation in the divine.”

Matthew Barrett, None Greater: The Undomesticated Attributes of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2019), 80–81.

Comments

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ. On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion. The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin. The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place without the first. J

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know. So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he knew that his cri

Repackaging the gospel? It's more like obscuring the gospel!

Preface : I recognize this post may make me unpopular with some, but I think it is an important issue to blog about here. I’ve had time to reflect on this video and in my opinion, I think what is in this video raises some questions. This gentleman featured below is slotted to speak at the SBC's 2020 Pastors' Conference and it prompted me to think more about this illustration. I want to note that I don't know him and I have no personal issue with him. I assume he is a brother in the LORD. Having said that, I see some significant issues here that relate to this type of preaching being clear on the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, it appears to be obscuring it in my observation. Concern: Should the SBC or churches, in general, be in the habit of holding this up as a good and healthy example? Let's think about it some together. (Watch this clip below here first.) Context: The clip was posted to stand on its own as if it were wise and sound on it

Search This Blog