Brief Summary
Yoo, begins with a brief background history of who George Whitefield is. He does it, by exposing some of Whitefield’s sermons and accomplishments as a preacher. He explains, how Whitefield’s doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ is in alignment with the orthodox view. For instance, in order to show the true deity of Jesus Christ, “which is a fundamental foundation for the faith of the believers,” he exposes Whitefield’s criticism of the Arians and the Socinians viewpoint of the deity of Jesus Christ. For example, the Arians, belief that Jesus Christ …show more content…
was a created being. In the other hand, the Socinians, claim that Jesus was an ordinary man, and yet later claim Him to be the savior. However, it is so interesting how Whitefield, during his time period hardly provided biblical verses or argues in public over the humanity of Christ, because this was not a vital concern to the people at that time.
Besides these characteristics, the two natures in Jesus Christ is critical to understand for the good of the believer. “Whitefield’s teaches that Christ is both very God and very man, having two distinct natures, but yet one person.” These two natures are never confounded; just like two parallel lines each remains in its own course. Since, the human being loss the ability to do good or seek God, a mediator was needed to bridge the gap and bring reconciliation between God and humanity. Jesus Christ death on the cross and expiatory sacrifice was able to fulfill God’s justice and appeasing God’s wrath bridging the gap. The Priestly office of Christ and Christ’s Satisfaction writings, brought light and concrete evidence of Jesus work as the Christ. His death as a vicarious sacrifice in substitution to our sins is a clear example of the deity of Jesus Christ. Therefore, the benefits of this sacrifice are that the veal is removed resulting in direct access to God, through Jesus Christ, who satisfied the justice of our heavenly Father. The author Yoo, then, carefully examines some argument regarding Whitefield’s views of the deity of Jesus Christ based on critics of other scholars. However, Whitefield’s biblical interpretation of the doctrine of Christ still provides exegetical information. In other words, is good to be used as biblical theology.
Critical Interaction This type of discussion demonstrates that in the world are many unrecognized Christian, theologians, and leaders that can lead us on the straight path of true biblical interpretation.
One significant viewpoint that Yoo mentions at the end is that Whitefield’s interpretation of the deity of Jesus Christ is in line with the Nicene and Chalcedonian council. Whitefield and many others, are practicing true biblical interpretation and we need to examine them in order to learn more. I’m not saying we should view and consider everyone as worthy of studying, instead we must study what other writer and preachers from around the world are teaching in order to determine sound doctrine. It is evident, that Yoo want us to consider the detailed interpretation of Whitefield’s as true
theology.
Conclusion
Clearly, the author is sending a shout out to those churches that have replaced sound biblical doctrine interpretation with a modern narrative viewpoint. In denying the reality of good low-profile theologians or pastors, the result is emerging churches with false teachers increasing the number of denominations. In addition, to consider that doctrine of Christ taught by Whitefield containing biblical sound truth, and if we put this truth together we’ll have a more complete truth of the deity of Jesus Christ. For this reason, Yoo has done an excellent job describing this topic.