Comments on: The Dangers of Triperspectivalism http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/ Church Planting, Technology & Culture Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:57:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mike Little http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-191010 Mike Little Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:42:33 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-191010 Enjoying the teaching on this. Your speaking right now..."go through a triperspectival filter". Still can't say or spell that word. :) Enjoying the teaching on this. Your speaking right now…”go through a triperspectival filter”. Still can’t say or spell that word. :)

]]> By: Colin http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-129827 Colin Wed, 21 Nov 2007 23:26:31 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-129827 This is a great discussion. We are just beginning to use the PPK model at our church. It is interesting to see that you guys seem to be doing the same thing. I would love to discuss this more with someone from Kaleo. Who "owns" this movement in your church? This is a great discussion. We are just beginning to use the PPK model at our church. It is interesting to see that you guys seem to be doing the same thing. I would love to discuss this more with someone from Kaleo. Who “owns” this movement in your church?

]]> By: Mick Porter http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-94331 Mick Porter Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:00:56 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-94331 You guys have got me really thinking from all this. I just posted something on a triperspectival view of gospel application: http://unveiledface.blogspot.com/2007/07/gospel-application-three-perspectives.html You guys have got me really thinking from all this. I just posted something on a triperspectival view of gospel application:
http://unveiledface.blogspot.com/2007/07/gospel-application-three-perspectives.html

]]> By: Mick Porter http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84350 Mick Porter Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:05:40 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84350 David (and Mike), Yes, that does help- lots! David (and Mike),

Yes, that does help- lots!

]]> By: David Fairchild http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84134 David Fairchild Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:08:43 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84134 Mike (Porter that is), I definitely appreciate your concern. I think this is why the normative side can not be diminished for the temptation to work this out in a kingly way. When looking at this theologically we should be asking "Why do we look at only three official offices and why did those chosen for the offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT need to be anointed with oil? What was behind this practice?" We see that their anointing set them apart to the Lord. The oil with which they were anointed was symbolic of the Holy Spirit. Endowed with the Spirit, through their anointing with holy oil, these prophets, priests, and kings, were transformed into the likeness of the Lord of Glory. It is noteworthy that in the Old Testament, these three offices of prophet, priest, and king were never united in one person. There were some in the Old Testament who functioned as both prophet and priest. Others functioned as both priest and king. But God never permitted any one person to hold all three offices. These offices pointed beyond themselves—they were shadows and types—pointing to the fulfillment of the One who is the Prophet, Priest, and King. Incidently, they are the only official offices that needed to be annointed with oil. In Christ, the offices of prophet, priest, and king are united. He is the One to whom the Old Testament prophets, priest, and king are united. He is the One to whom the Old Testament prophets, priests, and kings pointed. As Prophet, he proclaims salvation. As Priest, he merits salvation. As King, he applies salvation. Christ has been ordained by God the father to be our prophet, priest, and king. Christ has been anointed not with the holy oil used in the Old Testament, but with the Holy Spirit himself. The concern that this is reductionistic is only valid if God Himself did not limit (in foreshadow/type) his annointed offices to three. I do believe (as Mike Foster has stated) that the working out of Christ's offices of Prophet, Priest, and King would help us to understand how we was a shepherd, how we was a counselor, how we was a creator. We don't limit his activity for the sake of neat and tidy triads, but we also see that this was the flow of the OT and it is what Christ won for us and we are now described as prophets, priests, and kings by the very fact of Christ's imputed righteousness. He's succeeded where Adam has failed as prophet/priest/king. I can not stress enough the importance of having a good Christology (normative) before we run out and apply a theological framework which we may not have fully thought through. Drew's caution here is needful to those who are elders and wanting to apply MP to their ministry. I hope this helps in some way. Great question brother. Mike (Porter that is), I definitely appreciate your concern. I think this is why the normative side can not be diminished for the temptation to work this out in a kingly way. When looking at this theologically we should be asking “Why do we look at only three official offices and why did those chosen for the offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT need to be anointed with oil? What was behind this practice?” We see that their anointing set them apart to the Lord. The oil with which they were anointed was symbolic of the Holy Spirit. Endowed with the Spirit, through their anointing with holy oil, these prophets, priests, and kings, were transformed into the likeness of the Lord of Glory.

It is noteworthy that in the Old Testament, these three offices of prophet, priest, and king were never united in one person. There were some in the Old Testament who functioned as both prophet and priest. Others functioned as both priest and king. But God never permitted any one person to hold all three offices. These offices pointed beyond themselves—they were shadows and types—pointing to the fulfillment of the One who is the Prophet, Priest, and King. Incidently, they are the only official offices that needed to be annointed with oil.

In Christ, the offices of prophet, priest, and king are united. He is the One to whom the Old Testament prophets, priest, and king are united. He is the One to whom the Old Testament prophets, priests, and kings pointed. As Prophet, he proclaims salvation. As Priest, he merits salvation. As King, he applies salvation.

Christ has been ordained by God the father to be our prophet, priest, and king. Christ has been anointed not with the holy oil used in the Old Testament, but with the Holy Spirit himself.

The concern that this is reductionistic is only valid if God Himself did not limit (in foreshadow/type) his annointed offices to three. I do believe (as Mike Foster has stated) that the working out of Christ’s offices of Prophet, Priest, and King would help us to understand how we was a shepherd, how we was a counselor, how we was a creator. We don’t limit his activity for the sake of neat and tidy triads, but we also see that this was the flow of the OT and it is what Christ won for us and we are now described as prophets, priests, and kings by the very fact of Christ’s imputed righteousness. He’s succeeded where Adam has failed as prophet/priest/king.

I can not stress enough the importance of having a good Christology (normative) before we run out and apply a theological framework which we may not have fully thought through. Drew’s caution here is needful to those who are elders and wanting to apply MP to their ministry.

I hope this helps in some way. Great question brother.

]]> By: Michael Foster http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84111 Michael Foster Wed, 04 Jul 2007 07:25:33 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84111 "I also wonder if there’s not a further risk of reductionism in trying to go too far in isolating 3 offices. Because Christ is also wise man, counselor, shepherd, creator, etc?" You have a point but I would argue that all those things you mentioned could easily fall into one of the three offices of Christ. Also, I suppose it all depends on how loosely you use the word office. “I also wonder if there’s not a further risk of reductionism in trying to go too far in isolating 3 offices. Because Christ is also wise man, counselor, shepherd, creator, etc?”

You have a point but I would argue that all those things you mentioned could easily fall into one of the three offices of Christ. Also, I suppose it all depends on how loosely you use the word office.

]]> By: Mick Porter http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84102 Mick Porter Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:25:01 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84102 Drew, I agree with those risks. I think the guys (in Australia) that got focused on the whole APEPT (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher) thing ran straight into those very potholes. Especially the "personality test" bit! Certainly a grounding in Christ's nature is the first guard against such risks. I also wonder if there's not a further risk of reductionism in trying to go too far in isolating 3 offices. Because Christ is also wise man, counselor, shepherd, creator, etc? Drew,

I agree with those risks. I think the guys (in Australia) that got focused on the whole APEPT (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher) thing ran straight into those very potholes. Especially the “personality test” bit!

Certainly a grounding in Christ’s nature is the first guard against such risks.

I also wonder if there’s not a further risk of reductionism in trying to go too far in isolating 3 offices. Because Christ is also wise man, counselor, shepherd, creator, etc?

]]> By: Mike http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84026 Mike Tue, 03 Jul 2007 23:44:13 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-84026 Thanks for this post. I have never heard of this subject before. Thanks for this post. I have never heard of this subject before.

]]> By: Michael Foster http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-83970 Michael Foster Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:17:00 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-83970 For anyone who is interested in doing such a study for themselves I recommend going to monergism.com and doing a search for "offices of Christ." For anyone who is interested in doing such a study for themselves I recommend going to monergism.com and doing a search for “offices of Christ.”

]]> By: D. Goodmanson http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-83968 D. Goodmanson Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:01:55 +0000 http://www.goodmanson.com/2007-07/03/the-dangers-of-triperspectivalism/#comment-83968 Good word Foster on routing it in Christ' offices. This is something we mentioned in our meeting as well. The more we focus on him, the less it will become a consumeristic or pragmatic tool devoid of it's intention. Good word Foster on routing it in Christ’ offices. This is something we mentioned in our meeting as well. The more we focus on him, the less it will become a consumeristic or pragmatic tool devoid of it’s intention.

]]>