2009-02-09

Spurgeon says, "it is truly so; the old, old gospel is always new. The modern doctrine is only new in name; it is, after all, nothing but a hash of stale heresies and mouldy speculations." Read the Bible

Jay Dyer claims that a Calvinists should be a "Monothelite, in that in conversion, the divine will supplants the human will. And this would go for Christ's divine will as well." Turretinfan responds by showing that Calvinists hold the biblical doctrine that in regeneration, a man is given a new heart. "The error (whether actually justified or not) for which Monothelites were criticized was a denial of the human nature of Christ." In this view, Christ only has a divine will, and no human will. Turretinfan says that Christ has a human will, and that his human obedience to the moral law is his active obedience, which Monothelitism would undermine. This teaching may also undermine Christ's obedience in dying. Man only has one will, and the fact that man's heart is changed in regeneration has nothing to do with Monothelitism. T-fan then redirects the criticism and argues that transubstantiation actually undermines the humanity of Christ (borrowing from Aristotelian categories) and to assert that the bread and wine are literally the physical body and blood of Christ (when there is no change) is implicitly to deny that Christ's body and blood is in any way like our human bodies. Moreover, one of the bishops of Rome actually was condemned by an ecumenical council (The Sixth Ecumenical Council, Constantinople III) as a Monothelite. Of course, this sort of thing (posthumous anathemas for heresy) are, or should be troubling, for those who wish to trust that their church is providing them with the truth and not an heretical error. Response to Jay Dyer on Calvinism (Part 4 of 13)

Here's a brief reminder that ( a) not all people are sons and daughters of God; (b) God has counted us righteous in Christ, counting our sins to Him, and punishing them in Him instead; and (c), God then disciplines His children, as a good Father, because He loves them. Thank God for Fatherly Love

Some scientists are attempting to produce an anti-HIV drug that acts as a mutagen, causing even more rapid mutation in the virus, which already mutates rather quickly. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/02/09/hiv-mutation-02.html

Turretinfan comments on Spurgeon's use of Matthew 23:37, saying: "Spurgeon's modification of the verse seems to demonstrate that he himself did not fully understand it, for he changes what Jesus said, such that (as modified) Jesus is seeking to gather the same group as is willing contrary to His will. In fact, however, the text makes a distinction. As I have explained in more detail elsewhere (link), the first group are the denizens and people of Jerusalem, the latter group are the leaders of Jerusalem." (e.g. the difference between "How often would I have gathered you, but you would not" and "How often would I have gathered your children). Spurgeon - Quotation and Three Observations

An Arminian interlocutor continues to try to prove LFW using dictionary definitions. Hays points out that he fails to distinguish between semantic equivocation and conceptual equivocation (the meaning of words and the meaning of ideas), as the compatibilist/incompatibilist debate is fundamentally a debate over the concept of freedom, not the meaning of words in a dictionary. And why would the 'common man' reject the idea that he chooses the thing that is the object of his strongest desire? Moreover, counterfactual statements frequently have explicit deferential factors (e.g. “If only I knew then what I know how, I’d do things differently!”); indeed, this affirms compatibilism as this shows how factors affect choice. Somehow it is unlikely that philosophers would be impressed by arguments from dictionary definitions. The Arminian Comicals

Hays responds to the objection, which is an emotional plea for universalism, and against hell, that heaven wouldn't be heaven without loved ones, that even in this life we experience tradeoffs in relationships that are good and normal (my own example is that a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife), where one relationship supplants and diminishes the closeness of another, yet a person is happier for it. Heaven for the survivors

Phillips has some insightful comments (in response to an article on a lack of 'seminary-trained' pastors for rural areas in the USA) on how seminary is not where one begins ministry training, nor is it the true place biblically where this will happen. Apprenticeship in the local church is the biblical model (not that seminary is bad or wrong). He has some excellent points: e.g. 1. Formal, Caesar-accredited seminary education is in no way a Biblical requirement for pastoral ministry; 2. The first requirement is that a man be a genuine convert to the Lord Jesus Christ. No seminary issues regeneration. The Lord effects it, and local churches can observe and confirm it. Don't take these statements to think that it is a cop-out from hard work - if one doesn't go to seminary, he must learn Greek, Hebrew, studying, preaching, teaching, and theology outside of it. "formal seminary education just is not necessary, and churches should not simply be shipping everyone off to Debtor's Prison or going without pastors because seminary grads can't afford to pastor them. I see this as an opportunity for Biblically-faithful churches to implement the Biblical model."  Rural churches, seminarians, the Bible

Piper reminds us that Jesus wants his followers to be free from worry. While human fathers are comforting, even though they are so limited, "it is totally different with their Father in heaven. He knows everything about them now and tomorrow, inside and out. He sees every need. Add to that, his huge eagerness to meet their needs (the "much more" of Matt. 6:30). Add to that his complete ability to do what he is eager to do (he feeds billions of birds hourly, Matt. 6:26)." Your Father Knows What You Need

Why pray if God is sovereign - part 2: First, "God has commanded us to pray, and our response to this command must first and foremost be one of obedience. Even if we never reach a clear understanding of the relationship between the sovereignty of God and the prayers of man, the fact that God has commanded it should be enough to move us to pray." Second, Jesus modeled prayer in His life - and in Gethsemane He even prayed that the cross would pass Him, even though He knew full well that it was ordained by God, as He had foretold it numerous times Himself. "even though Jesus was well aware that His death at Calvary had been preordained by God, He still saw fit to petition His Father that this cup might pass from him." Even if this doesn't clear up the tension, it should motivate believers to pray fervently. Why Pray if God Is Sovereign- (Part 2)

From Challies: "With the recession on the brink of becoming the longest in the postwar era, a milestone may be at hand: Women are poised to surpass men on the nation's payrolls, taking the majority for the first time in American history." Women to Pass Men in the Job Force

Russ Moore argues that for parents to give their children cellphones and total freedom to use them, without observation, etc. is to preach a false gospel, since it potentially exposes them to great temptation, and God the Father doesn't entrust us with many things until we are ready, and therefore it could be showing a cavalier attitude and abrogation of parenting that God Himself doesn't do in raising His children. http://www.russellmoore.com/index.php/2009/02/09/does-your-childs-cell-phone-preach-another-gospel/

Challies quotes David Wells as he speaks of 9/11. "This moment of tragedy and evil shone its own light on the Church and what we came to see was not a happy sight. For what has become conspicuous by its scarcity, and not least in the evangelical corner of it, is a spiritual gravitas, one which could match the depth of horrendous evil and address issues of such seriousness. Evangelicalism, now much absorbed by the arts and tricks of marketing, is simply not very serious anymore." Spiritual Gravitas

JT quotes this: ""Every theory has its difficulties, but you have not considered whether any other theory has less difficulties than the one you have criticized."" ... it's insufficient to find weaknesses in a theory without considering whether or not the weaknesses of alternate theories are worse. Criticizing Theories and Weighing the Alternatives

White goes over his question for Ehrman regarding conjectural emendation, where Ehrman effectively says that it is possible that the text was corrupted such that the original reading is not in the text, and when he does point to an example, it is in 1 Peter 3:19, where there is no variant in the manuscript tradition, and there is no basis on which to suggest the emendation aside from the difficulty of interpretation. Tenacity and Conjectural Emendation

This post applies Psalm 36 to the financial crisis and the evil therein - showing that the Bible is very much relevant and insightful in our day. http://pcfchurch.org/pastorsblog/is-the-word-of-god-relevant

"Words and phrases like "savior", "son of God" and "gospel"--words the New Testament shares in common with the Roman political world--should, it is argued, be read as an attempt to purposefully subvert the Roman Empire, it's aims, and its authority. One is, of course, from here free to draw all sorts of contemporary political applications. The New Testament is all about Christ and Caesar, right? Not so fast says Seyoon Kim, a professor of New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary, who tries to temper the recent enthusiasm for an anti-imperial hermeneutic in his book Christ and Caesar: The Gospel and the Roman Empire in the Writings of Paul and Luke (Eerdmans 2008)." The post goes on to give some details of the counterarguments. Christ and Caesar, Not So Fast