Moody Bible Institute

Abstract The resurgence of interest in Paul as missionary has neglected the role of the Holy Spirit. It is argued that the Spirit’s character and role is intrinsically missional, justifying a study of the Missio Spiritus Sancti within a triad relationship with the Father and Son. Three texts are considered: in 1 Thessalonians, the missional Spirit was at work through Paul’s preaching as a saving and ‘experienced power’ (1:5), expressed visibly by the believers’ joy at conversion (1:6) with missional implications within and outside the church. In 4:8, and in Paul’s forced absence, God is still present as evidenced by his giving his Holy Spirit to the Thessalonian siblingship, instilling a missional lifestyle distinct from those on the periphery of the church (i.e., Gentiles, 4:5). In Romans, Paul reminds the believers how his preaching and the Holy Spirit purposefully combine to ‘set apart’ the Gentiles, a salvific moment when they first embraced the gospel (15:16). Paul goes on to rehearse the work of the Spirit in his previous missionary endeavours to the Gentiles as evidenced by the power of ‘signs’ and ‘wonders’ (15:19), aware that the same Spirit who galvanised his past work will be necessary as he relocates to Spain, a gentile region (15:24). In Philippians, and in light of Paul’s incarceration, the church engages in intercessory prayer—an instrument of the church’s mission—for God to supply Paul with the Spirit of Jesus Christ in preparation for his upcoming trial (1:19). And in 1:27a, and in light of adversity from outside, the church is to live united in the Spirit by showing the gospel while also actively contending together in proclaiming or sowing the good news (1:27b).

Abstract Tertullian is often portrayed as a prescient figure who accurately anticipated the Nicene consensus about the Trinity. But when he is examined against the background of his immediate predecessors, he falls into place as a typical second-century Logos theologian. He drew especially from Theophilus of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus of Lyons. At the same time, Tertullian did introduce some important innovations. His trinitarian language of ‘substance’ and ‘person’, rooted in Stoic metaphysics, offered the church a new way to be monotheistic while retaining the full deity and consubstantiality of the Word. Tertullian also significantly developed the concept of a divine oikonomia, God’s plan to create and redeem the world. The Son and Spirit are emissaries of the Father’s will—not ontologically inferior to him, yet ranked lower in the way that the sent are always subordinate to the sender. For this reason, Tertullian denied that a Father/Son relationship was eternal within the Trinity, seeing it rather as a new development emerging from God’s plan to make the world. Such temporal paternity and filiation distances Tertullian from the eventual Nicene consensus, which accepted instead the eternal generation theory of Origen. While Tertullian did propose some important terms that would gain traction among the Nicene fathers, he was also marked by a subordinationist tendency that had affinities with Arianism. Tertullian’s most accurate anticipation of Nicaea was his insistence on three co-eternal and consubstantial Persons. Historical theologians need to start admitting that Tertullian was a far cry from being fully Nicene. Rather, he offered a clever but still imperfect half-step toward what would become official orthodoxy..

Abstract In 1 Sam 3:18b, Eli responds to a prophetic judgment with the phrase “it is the Lord, may he do what is good in his eyes.” Most commentators understand this response as an example of pious acceptance of divine judgment. The claim of this article is that a plausible case can be made for reading Eli’s response as culpably passive. This case will be made following two lines of evidence. First, I will examine an oracle of judgment against an individual and the response as a type-scene in Samuel-Kings. Second, I will examine how this culpable passivity fits with the characterization of Eli in 1 Samuel 1-3.