Five reasons to study theology: 1) You’re a theologian already… 2) Your love for Jesus is intrinsically linked with your knowledge of His Word… 3) Your doctrine will determine how you live… 4) Your affections will determine what you study… 5) Your humility depends on it…http://cal.vini.st/2009/02/five-reasons-you-need-to-study-theology/
Packer defines worldliness as "any internalizing of the earthbound self-absorption of the people of this world." A Definition of Worldliness
Haykin comments on an example of nuda scriptura, and quotes Spurgeon, which is essentially an exaltation of autonomy at the expense of all tradition that ultimately leads to a radical individualism well-nigh indistinguishable from a Paine or Emerson—well, the individual would have given this caveat, a commitment to biblical authority. An adherent to nuda scriptura rejects councils, etc., failing to recognize their biblical import. “It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others.” We need to consider the Fathers not as equivalent authorities to Scripture, but as senior conversation partners in our theological task - not as infallible, but we must not disregard them. The Ancient Church Fathers- senior partners in a conversation
Carolyn Mahaney reminds single women to nurture children, and so express their femininity. For even if they don't have biological children, they surely can be spiritual mothers. Nurturing Children
For those interested, here is an Anglican arguing for paedo-communion. Glenn Davies on Children at Communion
Bird comments on an interview with Waters on Wright's new book, who studied under E.P. Sanders and regards the Traditional Reformed view and the New Perspective view as thoroughly incompatibable. 1) To the idea that Wright makes far too much of "exile" rather than "being-in-Adam", Bird thinks that while Wright's focus on exile is problematic in some respects esp. as a controlling meta-narrative it isn't at odds with a creation-Adam-sin-Abraham-Israel-Messiah narrative. 2) Waters counters that what Wright needs is a construal of the controlling story along the lines of Adam (covenant of works) and Christ (covenant of grace); but it seems Wright agrees with the gist of this. Bird points out that John Piper gave his own view as one is either in Adam or in Christ at ETS once (Wright and Piper may have more in common here than is apparent!) 3) Bird agrees that it is biblical to speak of justification according to works when properly understood, but not justification on the basis of works, and while he thinks Wright is too fuzzy here, he also thinks Wright holds this. 4) On the "Righteousness of God" Waters is correct that it cannot be reduced to God's covenant faithfulness (cf. Mark Seifrid's dictum is that all covenant keeping is righteous but not all righteousness is covenant keeping!) - but it also can't be separated from God's faithfulness to Israel's covenant. 6) Wright (and Bird) understand justification as participating in Christ's vindication in his resurrection, and believers are thus justified since they participate in Christ and share in his justification. Guy Waters on N.T. Wright's new book
Phil Johnson comments on the thought of Bork and Yeats who put forward that the problem is not some end-times beast that is slouching toward Bethlehem; the real problem is that society itself is slouching toward Gomorrah, and says, "As we look at the state of Christ's church worldwide today, we see an even more frightening prospect. By and large, the church has fallen in love with Gomorrah, and has veered off that direction in a dead sprint. Christians seem as if they are on a collective quest to see how much of the world they can absorb and imitate. Instead of trying to win the world the way Christ commanded, the church seems determined to see how much like the world she can become." There is a pervasive willingness to accommodate divine truth to the world. e.g. One pastor said churches nowadays don't mention hell because "it isn't sexy enough anymore." Many are complicit in neglecting the Gospel as the power of God to salvation in favour of a consumeristic emphasis on being appealing rather than faithful. James 4-4
Here's a somewhat optimistic quote from Spurgeon on the impending doom of modernism, the inevitable failure of those who employ its ways, the lack of novelty in Satan's tactics therein, and their subsequent disappeal, etc. and an exhortation to remain focused on those things within your reach, not to worry, and to strive to be fully faithful in the areas over which God has set you. l'Optimisme
Engwer points out that its not contradictory for non-christians to have pleasant near-death experiences, since it is a near death experience, and not heaven or hell. Moreover, who knows whether one is deceived by a demon, etc? Why Would A Non-Christian Have A Positive Near-Death Experience-
Hays has a lengthy post on the paranormal. It begins with a justification for Christian interest in these matters: "1.Evaluating paranormals claims raise much the same issues as evaluating miraculous claims. 2.Unbelievers often claim that the Bible is incredible because it describes a world which is a world apart from the world we actually experience. But if paranormal phenomena happen, then the world of the Bible is not fundamentally different from the world we experience today. Of course, at that point the unbeliever might shift grounds. He might accept the paranormal, but try to explain it on secular grounds–then do the same with Scripture. However, that still advances the argument. Instead of debating whether these events ever happen, we’re not debating the proper interpretation of the event. 3.Science and medicine are wonderful disciplines. But they have their limitations. For example, some medical conditions may have a spiritual or occultic source of origin. As such, they need a different remedy. 4.There’s an extensive literature on psi. Writers range from charlatans to philosophers and scholars. In addition, every ideological viewpoint is represented–orthodoxy, heterodoxy, secularism, occultism, &c." He discusses theories, evidence, terminology, presents critiques, and so on. With the rising popularity of such things in our society (take a look in a bookstore), this post is worth a read. There is also an impressive annotated biography. Bell, book, & candle
Hays provides some thoughts when asked about how the parable of the rich man and lazarus fits with an earlier comment he made in the previous post concerning the disposition of the dead to deceive. He points out that i) common grace is the reason person would be virtuously concerned about others. Why would common grace extend to the damned? Absent this, why would he care? ii) The parable appears to fit a particular type of well-known story having a rich man and poor man whose fortunes are reversed, which wasn't meant to make a comment of actual eschatology. Now, was no doubt opposing the Sadducees, who claimed that there was no resurrection from the dead. The Sadducees were wealthy, and the entire composition of the story appears to be a challenge to them… In this view, then, "It is as though Jesus says, ‘Now I will tell you a story of two people; one served God and the other mammon,’”" iii) the rich man's motives aren't necessarily altruistic or virtuous: His concern, though, is characteristic of the rich, whose circle of compassion extends to ‘friends,’ ‘brothers,’ ‘relatives,’ and ‘rich neighbors’ who are able to repay concern with concern, hospitality with hospitality. Even his concern is self-indicting. Damned if you do and damned if you don't
Hays responds to a question regarding the moral appropriateness for Christians with respect to teaching children sexual education, and why there is a problem with detailing the technical matters if the morality is also taught? He argues that such knowledge isn't necessary if one isn't married - why do pre-married teens need it? "Opponents of abstinence-only programs are not merely recommending that we teach students about contraception. Rather, they advocate the free distribution of contraceptives." "There are times when ignorance is virtuous. For example, I hope most folks are ignorant of how to construct a biochemical weapon." Safe sex
It is a straw man to think a presuppositional apologist simply takes his own position for granted. Needless to say, that’s a caricature of Van Tilian apologetics. It would be more accurate to say that, according to Van Tilian apologetics, the unbeliever is taking certain truths for granted that only make sense within a Christian worldview. The unbeliever is a closet presuppositionalist. And the job of a Van Tilian apologist is to make the unbeliever aware of his tacit, theistic presuppositions. He tries to disprove the unbeliever’s worldview by exposing its residual and irreducible commitment to certain theistic truths, while proving his own by elimination. A twinge of irony
Hays gives a definition of grace: "Saving grace has reference to all the things that God does to and for the elect to ensure their salvation, viz. election, redemption, regeneration, justification, sanctification, preservation, glorification. Common grace denotes all the things that God does to and for the reprobate to enable them to perform natural goods." What is grace-
Richard Dawkins is afraid to debate Ray Comfort for $20000, twice his normal speaking fee. I'll Debate Richard Dawkins for $100,000
Turretinfan writes that Athanasius is considered an ally of Protestants, so some of these apologists turn to spurious works: pseudographic writings that are attributed to some father but were not actually written by him. This can happen two ways: (1) unintentionally or (2) deliberately. "now we find apologists for Rome citing a spurious, pseudographic work entitled "Homily of the Papyrus of Turin." This work is not part of any standard corpus of Athanasian writings, and no scholar who deals with Athanasius has (to my knowledge) ever identified it as authentic. It is not found in any Greek manuscripts but apparently comes down to us in a single Coptic manuscript. The manuscript does have the name "Athanasius" at the top, but this is not a sufficient reason to consider it an authentic work, as anyone familiar with ancient manuscripts would be aware." T-fan challenges Romanists to let the fathers be the fathers. Misquoting Athanasius
It's likely that many people skim the Psalms without noticing certain things. Psalm 21:8-12 has a vivid picture of hell. "There are three dreadful images in the space of five verses. Enemies of God are thrown into a blazing oven (one); they are swallowed up by the fire of the LORD’s wrath (one and a half, because let’s say the oven, the fire and the wrath of God are all really the same idea); their children are destroyed (two); and someone—God himself—is aiming at their faces with a bow." This language isn't reserved for hypocritical religious leaders. It's for the enemies of God's people. To apply this whole Psalm to Jesus isn't wrong, but these images set this Psalm apart. Even the next generation's hope is extinguished - there is no comfort for those in the oven of wrath. Fiery and sharp images of hell
As Muslim nations continue to gain ground in the United Nations with their anti-blasphemy resolution, White points to their gross hypocrisy, as they claim to do this to protect religions and claim to be trying to stop offense against religions. Yet, the claims of the Qur'an are deeply offensive to Christianity, so "will those pushing this ban on "religious blasphemy" silence the preaching of the Qur'an? Of course not. Hence, what is the ultimate goal of these Islamic states in pushing this agenda? Dhimmitude of non-Muslims, pure and simple." Freedom to Preach Death Watch Continued
Here's a proposal that Hebrews is a sermon preached by Paul and penned by Luke, accounting for its differences in style. i) It has sophisticated Greek, as Luke does. ii) This explains such early manuscript evidence as P46, which includes Hebrews within the Pauline corpus and such early church fathers as Clement, who holds to Pauline authorship of Hebrew. Lukan Perspective
Here's a book urging Christian couples not to wait to have children. Start Your Family
Tony Jones is a Pelagian (this isn't really a surprise). DeYoung points to his posts to this effect. "There are so many things wrong with these posts, from the erroneous historical reconstruction, to the strawmen arguments (e.g., if you believe in original sin you can't believe in human responsibility), to conversation stoppers from Jones like "Watch out, Brian, the NeoReformed stormtroopers went after Scot McKnight last week, and they'll probably come after you here!"" Saint Who-
Obama aims to pull out 100000 troops by Aug. 31/2010, leaving 35000 to 50000 until Dec. 31/2011, and he also pledged to increase the number of soldiers and marines in the armed forces to relieve the burden on those serving and their families. http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/02/27/obama-iraq.html?ref=rss&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r3:c0.0631438:b22353116
Here's a collection of links arguing that Obama's economic policies are going to harm the nation. Also, a poll showed people pick Obama as their hero over Jesus - "Among the "values" that moved Obama ahead of Christ, the walking brain-dead listed "Doing what's right regardless of personal consequences" with 89 percent, "Not giving up until the goal is accomplished" with 83 percent and "Doing more than what other people expect of them," with 82 percent. Also popular were "Overcoming adversity" and "Staying level-headed in a crisis."" Eek. 09 e.g. "The president says he wants to eliminate the George W. Bush tax cuts "on the wealthy," a core promise of his campaign. But those cuts help reduce the cost of capital in America, an essential tool to helping business out of this recession. Raising the capital gains tax, as Obama proposes, will make private investment dollars even scarcer, as will hiking income taxes on those most likely to invest in the economy." http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090226/OPINION01/902260349/1008
No comments:
Post a Comment