Theology beacon dictionary of theology
Download 6.66 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- For Further Reading: Crannell, "Obedience of Jesus," 7SB£; Knight, "Philippians," BBC; Wiley, CT 2:143-216.
- For Further Reading: Unger, Biblical Demonology; Koch, Christian Counselling and Occultism; Tenney, "Worship of the Occult," New Testament Survey.
- SACRIFICE, CONSECRATE (CONSECRATION), STEWARDSHIP, MOSAIC LAW, EXPIATION. For Further Reading: Richardson, Theology of the New Testament, 297-301;
- For Further Reading: Chadwick, The Early Church, 41-53; Dowley, ed., Eerdmans Handbook to the History of Christianity, 117-19, 187-95, 239-40; Walker
- For Further Reading: Agnew, Transformed Christians, 99-111; Chapman, The Terminology of Holiness, 108; Corlett, Lord of All
- For Further
- For Further Reading: Clarke, An Outline of Christian Theology, 3rd ed.; Hills, Fundamental Christian Theology; Chafer, Systematic Theology
- ONENESS. See
OBEDIENCE OF CHRIST. The obedience of Christ is inextricably bound up with God's plan for redeeming the human race. Sometime, somewhere, the Godhead had to make a decision if the race was to be saved. We do not know all the details of this decision. But we do know from Scripture that a sacrifice had to be provided as an atonement for man's sin. We know still further that Christ gave himself to be the Propitiation for the sins of the whole world (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2; 4:10; Gal. 1:4; Eph. 5:2; 1 Tim. 2:6). But for the plan to work, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead had to become man; the Creator must become the creature. What condescension! It is at this point that the program of obedience began. Finding himself a man, Christ the Son humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross (Phil. 2:8). While here on earth, although He knew himself to be the Son of God, He was definitely, and sometimes painfully, human. Since He had emptied himself of His heavenly prerogatives, He must live and learn, work, suffer, and die as a man. "Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered; and having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation" (Heb. 5:8-9, nasb). His obedience to the Father's plan led Him straight to the Cross. And His death on the Cross marked the fulfillment of His perfect obedience. Many have raised the question, If Jesus was really the Son of God, why was it necessary to learn obedience? How and why should the perfect be made perfect? The answer seems to be that since He, the Son of God, emptied himself of His heavenly powers to become true flesh-and-blood man, it was necessary for His humanity to pass through all the stages of human life in order to complete His Saviorhood. Only then could He be truly the God-man. He must learn as men learn, He must obey as men must obey, for His Saviorhood to be complete. Let us see what His obedience accomplished. First, He was the perfect exemplar of obedience: He was subject to His parents; was careful to keep the moral law; had a proper attitude toward authority; and was always ready to obey the Father. The old pattern so characteristic of Israel's disobedience was broken by the perfect obedience of Christ. Second, His obedience qualified Him to be our Savior. A failure would have been fatal—the salvation of the race was at stake. But since He passed through all the vicissitudes of human ex- OBJECTIVITY—OCCULT, OCCULTISM 371
istence, and was obedient in everything, no finger of scorn can be pointed at Him, but with the redeemed hosts of the Book of Revelation we cry in exultation, "Worthy is the Lamb" (Rev. 5:12). Third, His obedience was the means by which He procured eternal salvation for men. The first Adam failed to obey God and brought death and destruction upon the human race. The Second Adam, although under the fiercest kind of temptation, rendered perfect obedience to the Father. His obedience, reversing what happened at the Fall, now makes it possible for man "to have a life that laughs at death, overleaps the grave, and swings outward and sweeps upward forever." See obedience, kenosis, christ, estates of christ, gethsemane.
C. Paul Gray OBJECTIVITY. Objectivity, usually contrasted with subjectivity, refers to the attitude of being unbiased in the process of knowing. Objectivity is usually considered, certainly by the scientific community, as a highly desirable goal, since it implies the absence of all distractions, all intervening or distorting (subjective) elements in the process of knowing an object. Since this goal is extremely difficult to achieve, pure objectivity is rarely if ever claimed. Many would say that such a state of pure receptivity is psychologically impossible. In recent theological discussion, however, the traditional dichotomy between subject and object has, to some extent, given way to an "I-Thou" vs. an "I-It" distinction. In this context, subjectivity and objectivity are both viewed in their relation to the eternal. Truth, in the thought of Emil Brunner, for example, is seen as "encounter" rather than "truths" objectively revealed to man through the Bible and the Church. Revelation thus is not knowledge about God; rather, it is God giving himself. For this reason, natural theology and metaphysics cannot ever provide adequate knowledge of God; they see God as an "It" rather than as a "Thou", whom to know in the latter fashion is to be shaken to the depths and remade. A more conservative approach sees revelation as both divine, personal self-disclosure and authentic teaching of timeless truths about God. See l-THOU. PROPOSITIONAL THEOLOGY For Further Reading: Brunner, Man in Revolt; Hordern, A Layman's Guide to Protestant Theology (rev. ed.). Alvin Harold Kauffman OBLATION. See offer, offering. OCCULT, OCCULTISM. Occult, from the Latin oc-cultus, means "secret" or "mysterious." The term has come to refer to knowledge beyond the range of ordinary understanding; knowledge of a supernatural kind, not bounded by modern scientific law. A fortune-teller, for example, claims knowledge of the occult because he says he can explain things which people generally cannot know. Occultism is the belief in hidden, mysterious, supernatural agencies and the possibility of subjecting them to human control. Through alleged occult sciences, such as astrology, fortune-telling, magic, spiritism, and sorcery, occultists, usually insecure persons, seek to bend the will of God, as it were, and to hold their own against men whom they think oppose them. They try thereby to gain the upper hand in life's power struggle. During ancient times there was wide belief in the occult, and the OT abounds with references to it. But both in Mosaic and prophetic times all types of occult practices were condemned. Examples are: Lev. 19:26; Deut. 18:9-13; Isa. 8:19. In the NT Jesus and His followers also met and opposed various forms of the occult. The apostle Paul, for example, faced up to the occult in Phil-ippi (Acts 16:16-18). In Gal. 5:20 witchcraft, a form of the occult, is listed among the grossest of sins. Writing of the theological place of the occult in the Bible, Kurt Koch suggests that in the OT occult phenomena are rooted in heathen magic; whereas in the NT activities are understood as symptoms of the conflict between the kingdom of the devil and the kingdom of God. Because of their implications in this conflict, all forms of occultism come under divine judgment and end in chaos (Christian Counselling and Occultism, 274). The fact that in the last half of the 20th century the occult has mushroomed to epidemic proportions, much of it with clear marks of demon power, could very well be a sign of the times. When people reject Christ, their unbelief often becomes credulity. Not receiving a love of the truth, they are easy prey for satanic deception (2 Thess. 2:1-12). See unification church, transcendental meditation, hare krishna, swedenborgianism, satan, demons (demon possession).
372 OFFER, OFFERING—OFFICES, ECCLESIASTICAL OFFER, OFFERING. To offer, in religious context, is to present a sacrifice or gift as an act of worship. That which is presented or given is called an offering or oblation. The latter term derives from the Latin oblatus (offered up, devoted, dedicated), used as a past participle of the verb, to offer. In the OT, these terms are especially prominent in Leviticus and Numbers (where there are more than 500 occurrences). Several kinds of offerings are prescribed within the Mosaic sacrificial system: (1) Sin offerings, for acts of unconscious transgression, mistakes, or other inadvertencies; (2) Trespass offerings, for guilt incurred by specific offenses; (3) Burnt offerings, symbolizing entire surrender to God; (4) Peace offerings, in renewal of right spiritual relations; (5) Meal and drink offerings, from the fruits of God's blessings upon the earth; (6) Heave and wave offerings (so called from the ceremony for their presentation), regarded as special gifts unto God. The prophets and Psalmists repudiate the efficacy of multiplying offerings (Amos 5:21-23; Isa. 1:11-14; Mic. 6:6-9; Ps. 40:6-8). The protest was not so much against the sacrificial system itself as its abuse. Offerings and oblations alone cannot atone for sin. The presenting to God of a gift implies the personal surrender of the giver in living obedience to God's will. Several fundamental ideas underlie the biblical conception of offerings: (1) God desires communion with His people; (2) Sin must be punished and/or expiated (atoned for); (3) Without the substitutionary sacrifice of life (shedding of blood), there is no forgiveness of sin. The NT, especially Hebrews, points to the fulfillment of the old sacrificial system in Jesus Christ. The former repeated sacrifices were ineffectual to cleanse the conscience of the worshipper. But now Christ's sinless self-offering has effected once for all a perfect and eternal redemption. The NT also exhorts us, as Christians, to present certain offerings to God: (1) The dedication of our bodies and minds (Rom. 12:1-2); (2) Deeds of love and fellowship (Heb. 13:16); (3) Material gifts and offerings (Phil. 4:18); (4) Praises and prayers (Heb. 13:15). Such are well-pleasing to Him. See SACRIFICE, CONSECRATE (CONSECRATION), STEWARDSHIP, MOSAIC LAW, EXPIATION.
In fact, some differentiation in ministerial function is discernible already in the NT, though there can be no certainty as to exactly what the titles there signify or how they differ from one another. Among the various names for those who were involved in the instruction and care of the churches are "elders" (Gr. presbyteroi, Acts 15:2; 20:17; 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; Jas. 5:14); "those having charge over you" (1 Thess. 5:12); "overseers" or "bishops" (Gr. episkopoi, Acts 20:28; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:2); "deacons" (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:8, 12); "pastors" (Eph. 4:11); "apostles," "prophets," "evangelists," and "teachers" (Eph. 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:28). Paul, writing to the Corinthians, places some order on this array of ministerial offices in declaring that apostles, followed by prophets, and then teachers, head up a kind of "hierarchy" in which helpers and administrators of various sorts occupy lesser roles (1 Cor. 12:28ff). By the time of Ignatius of Antioch (d. a.d. 115) the "apostles," "prophets," and "teachers" of the first missionary generation had given way to "bishops," "presbyters," and "deacons" as the chief offices of ministry. The process of change is obscure, but it would appear that as local congregations consolidated, travelling missionaries came to be eclipsed by permanent resident ministers who could more adequately and consistently oversee the needs of the Church in each area. In this way a transition occurred from an itinerant ministry to a local and pastoral ministry. The "bishops," "presbyters," and "deacons" were the primary practitioners of the developing pastoral ministry. Numerous writings of the second century indicate that at first the offices of bishop and presbyter were the same, with deacons making up a second, somewhat lesser office. Liturgical functions apparently set them apart with the presbyter-bishop presiding over the celebration of the Eucharist while the deacon assisted. Deacons were also administrators of church property and charitable relief. The latter role was shared by "deaconesses" who had special responsibilities for women. OFFICES OF CHRIST—OMNIPOTENCE 373
In time, as certain presbyter-bishops arose to positions of preeminence, they assumed exclusively the title "bishop," while their ministerial brethren continued as "presbyters." These bishops claimed the power to ordain and to correspond on a church's behalf with other churches. Both offices came to be assisted not only by deacons but also a host of lesser offices, including those of "reader," "exorcist," "sub-deacon," and "acolyte." See clergy, episcopacy, church government, chain of command, minister (ministry). For Further Reading: Chadwick, The Early Church, 41-53; Dowley, ed., Eerdman's Handbook to the History of Christianity, 117-19, 187-95, 239-40; Walker, A History of the Christian Church, 39-42, 81-84, 150-52, 189-90. Harold E. Raser OFFICES OF CHRIST. See estates of Christ. OLD MAN. Although it occurs only three times in the NT (Rom. 6:6; Eph. 4:22; Col. 3:10), the expression "old man" (KJV) is a central concept in the Wesleyan interpretation of Christian holiness. However, within this tradition differences exist as to the exact relation of the term to the preconversion life-style and to the sinful nature in the unsanctified believer. Because Rom. 6:6 appears in a more detailed and extended setting than the other two references, it provides the primary meaning of the term and may perhaps provide the clue to approaching this interpretive problem in the Wesleyan tradition. With this as our point of departure, we may proceed through three intersecting areas of concern: Grammatically, a common environment for all three passages is the contrasting moods of the indicative (statements of fact) and the imperative (commands) involving the status and treatment of the "old man." (See BBC, 9:218-21, 414-15; Howard, Newness of Life, 102-3, 134-48.) This raises the questions, When were or are these indicative facts accomplished, and What, then, are the foci of the imperative commands? The answer to these queries are contextually discovered. The indicative statement about the "old man" in Rom. 6:6 is related to sin as an inner, dynamic force rather than to sin as an act (vv. 1-11). The means for dealing with this sinful principle is death (vv. 2-4, 7); for the "old man" it is crucifixion. Because the instrument of death of and fo indwelling sin is the cross of Christ (w. 3-5, 9), the "old man" which is crucified is thereby identified with the sinful nature. Since the "old man" is identified with the sin principle and the purpose of its crucifixion is the destruction of the "body of sin" (v. 6), the latter expression cannot be the sinful nature, otherwise a tautology is created. In light of the subsequent imperatives of vv. 12-19 being related to the body as representative of the total person, we may say that the "body of sin" is the human personality when it is the vehicle of the sinful nature (cf. Howard, 104). By this purposive function of the destruction of the "body of sin," the indicative mood in which the crucifixion of the "old man" is expressed is thereby so related to the imperatives for liberation from inbred sin as to indicate that the "old man" refers to the principle of sin rather than to the preconversion life-style. Lexically, by recognizing the close identification of the "old man" with the term "flesh" (Barclay, The Mind of St. Paul, 199-200) and by understanding the "old man" as a likely rephrasing of "in Adam" (Rom. 5:12-21), it is possible to state that the "old man" is an inner, moral condition "carried over" from the preregenerate state into the justified relationship, rather than the complex of preconversion deeds. Although this approach does not solve all interpretive difficulties, we may, by employing the above framework, relate the three references to the "old man" in this way: The "old man" is closely related to the past life of sin (Col. 3:10), but is not necessarily identical with it (Eph. 4:22). Rather, it is a morally dynamic "carry-over" from the unregenerate state (Rom. 6:6) which may be resolved subsequent to conversion through a personal, subjective, and decisive identification with the death and resurrection of Christ (cf. Purkiser, Sanctification and Its Synonyms, 89, fn. 14). See carnal mind, carnal christians, cleansing.
Omnipotence is necessarily consistent with the attributes of self-existence, infinity, unity, and sovereignty. There is but one God, hence, there is no other who limits Him. In order to be sovereign, God must be free to do whatever He 374 OMNIPRESENCE—ONLY BEGOTTEN wills, at any time, anywhere, and in every detail (Ps. 115:3). Divine omnipotence is consistent with moral impossibilities, i.e., whatever is contrary to God's nature and will; e.g., the fact that God cannot lie, do unjustly, or love sin. It also implies the power of self-limitation, since it does not exclude human freedom. It is consistent with delegated creaturely powers. Whatever God entrusts remains His and returns to Him again (Rom. 13:1). God's power is inferred as absolute from the incomprehensible work of creation (Ps. 33:8-9; Jer. 10:12-13; 32:17, 27; Rev. 4:11). It is evident in nature (Rom. 1:20). It is the source of nature's orderliness (Heb. 1:3). The so-called laws of nature are "the paths God's power and wisdom take through creation" (Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, 72). Modern positivistic philosophies which allow for no knowledge beyond scientific description deny such power inasmuch as they deny causality in the usual sense. A few theistic thinkers, wrestling with the problem of natural evil, have been impelled either to deny God's goodness or limit His power, and have usually opted for the latter. Such answers merely push the problem further back and create greater problems with the resulting dualisms. Such are contrary to Scripture. Practically, the revealed truth of the divine omnipotence has given faith, hope, courage, and strength to the inner life of believers under testing (Gen. 17:1; Isaiah 40; Matt. 19:26; John 10:29; Eph. 3:20-21). See evil, attributes (divine), divine sovereignty. For Further Reading: Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy; McConnell, The Christian God; Clarke, The Christian Doctrine of God. ARNOLD E. AlRHART OMNIPRESENCE. This is a term that signifies that God is everywhere present at the same time. He is present with all that exists; He is absent from nothing that exists, thus we can speak of God's immanence. Daniel Steele held that God exists everywhere, not by an extension of His parts, but by His essential being. That God is repletively in space is not to be understood as God being diffused or extended like matter. Extension as a property of matter is subject to division and fragmentation. Hence, omnipresence does not presage, or betoken, pantheism, a view which holds that all things and beings of nature and existence are merely modes, attributes, or perhaps appearances of a single reality, as Spinoza believed. Christian theologians reject pantheism since it fails to make a distinction between the Creator and His creation; such failure portends fateful theological consequences. The nature god of pantheism is without personality. Omnipresence indicates divine essence, not simply knowledge and power. God could not be omniscient unless omnipresent; His perfection is preconditioned by all-presence, all-knowledge, and all-power. God is not habituated or restricted by space in His power and acting; the full force of His omnipotence can be brought to bear anywhere, any time. For instance, God is not obligated to move from place to place in case of emergency—He's already there. To challenge this thesis is to impugn His very existence as God, for He could not be a real and living God, sufficient for His universal responsibilities, apart from all-inclusive, boundless presence. God acts equally diverse and detailed wherever crises arise, whether redeemingly, lovingly, creatively, knowingly, or illuminatingly. God in total potential and full actuality can respond in infinite fashion to aggregate claims and needs. Contemporary theologians argue that omnipresence does not refer to an imprecise, extended space any more than eternity implies only unlimited time. These theologians disallow metaphysical significance for the divine attributes and claim that omnipresence is the ability of divine love to maintain itself unimpaired by the discrepancies of space (cf. 1 Kings 8:27; 2 Chron. 2:6; Isa. 66:1; Acts 17:28; Eph. 1:23). See attributes (divine), omnipotence. For Further Reading: Clarke, An Outline of Christian Theology, 3rd ed.; Hills, Fundamental Christian Theology; Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. 7. Mel-Thomas Rothwell OMNISCIENCE. See attributes, divine. ONENESS. See unity. ONLY BEGOTTEN. The word monogenes occurs nine times in the NT, referring to Isaac (Heb. 11:17), the widow's son (Luke 7:12), Jairus' daughter (8:42), the demoniac boy (9:38), and Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). In the first four references the word simply means "one child" born to a father. In a culture where children were considered to be a "heritage of the Lord" (Ps. 127:3), it is quite natural to expect that the greater the number of children, the greater the heritage. In an "only child" family the heritage was therefore precariously restricted to a single offspring. And where this was the case, the quality of relationships within the family structure was marked by a peculiar concern. ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT—ONTOLOGY 375
In the Johannine writings the use of monogenes in describing Jesus Christ goes beyond a mere exercise in numbering. It is used in the sense of a title which God ascribes to His Son. it is meant to convey an honor which is unparalleled and incomparable. The idea of "one of a kind" is projected. The singularity of Jesus Christ being the only One who can mediate salvation and life is stressed. Thus the emphasis of the Apostles' Creed is upon God's "only Son." Consistent with the whole thrust of Scripture is this emphasis upon the fact that Jesus Christ alone is the Savior of the world: "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven ... whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). The significant fact is preserved that there is not a variety of salvations; there is only one Door into the sheepfold (John 10); there is "one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5). See eternal generation, firstborn, christ. For Further Reading: Kittel, 4:739-41; Westcott, The
Directory: sites -> default -> files -> publications publications -> Table of Content forward introduction publications -> Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies Georgia Institute of Technology publications -> Housing Counseling Research in Chicago publications -> Communicating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Audiences publications -> New Brunswick Info Sheet on First Nations Child Welfare publications -> Paap’s Electronic Newsletter 14 November 2008 Volume 11 Number 22 towards ‘smart’ subsidies in agriculture: lessons from recent experience in malawi publications -> Information support of pedagogical process for the children experiencing difficulties with acquisition of preschool educational programs publications -> Asus’ ZenFone ar has Google’s augmentted and virtual reality baked in — but not combined publications -> School Readiness and Early Grade Success Consultation Memo Atlanta, ga Download 6.66 Mb. Share with your friends:
|