2009-05-19

James Grant observes the ‘anti-sabbatarianism’ in the ESV Study Bible, noting that the note on Isaiah 56:2 points to Romans 14:5. Basically, it presents Schreiner’s view that the latter means that the Sabbath is a matter of personal conscience, but doesn’t present alternative interpretations, even though this is a controversial matter. Anti-Sabbatarianism in the ESV Study Bible

Turretin argues that middle knowledge was not necessary because all things are either possible or actual, and therefore fall within free or natural knowledge. Untrue things cannot be foreseen as true – namely, it must be true that a person will do an action for God to see it as true. If divine providence extends to the acts of men then they cannot be indeterminate. If God sees an event as certain, it cannot be said to be uncertain. Middle knowledge removes God’s sovereignty over the creature and His freedom to base decisions solely on his own good pleasure, thereby contradicting the view of God presented in Romans 9. Middle Knowledge - Part 6

Patton doesn’t see any major line being crossed in the Shack. He denies that the book teaches any sort of modalism, holding to perichoresis or mutual indwelling of the persons of the Godhead. Patton excuses Young in that analogies of God will always fail. The book does lack the fear of God. Patton thinks it gets flak for being too popular, and that people should lay off. Seven More Points About The Shack

ETC points to a new monograph on the Pericope Alduterae: “In conclusion, PA's importance as a window into early Christianity perhaps parallels the degree to which earlier and present scholars have overlooked it. PA clearly was one of the most spoken, read, remembered, and transmitted stories about Jesus in the early Church, deserving its reputation as one of the most popular stories in the gospels.” The Pericope Adulterae, the Gospel of John and the Literacy of Jesus

DeYoung shows from his denomination, the RCA, that dialog is a conversation to nowhere, and with regard to homosexuality, it is merely a sleight of hand to make the minority position appear significant and tenable, as everyone just ‘talks’ about it. “Here’s how it usually happens in mainline denominations: a biblical position regarding homosexuality is on the books, it gets reaffirmed several times even as opposition to it grows, the opposition party is not the majority but they are loud so everyone decides to talk things over for a few years, it is discovered (surprise!) that people don’t agree on the issue, then more dialogue, then those opposed to the official denominational position ask for tolerance or for everyone to “trust the system” of checks and balances, the “system” at the local level refuses to uphold the denominational position, more pleas for everyone to get along and not let this “secondary” issue divide us, more deviation from the official position, further dialogue, official tolerance for the unofficial position, conservatives are labeled as divisive, judgmental troublemakers, a call for denomination wide healing is made, followed by urgent pleas to move on to more important matters, and finally people move on feeling glad this “difficult chapter in our life together” is over, the official position–whether officially or unofficially–is no more.” There are three positions a denomination can take: “1) Homosexual behavior is sinful. 2) Homosexual behavior is to be celebrated. 3) We can allow for both positions. Denominations never get to 2 except by going first to 3.” Dialog is to share ‘perspectives’ and it has a predetermined outcome – no resolution but to resolve nothing. Death by Dialogue

Rachel Barkley is a 37 year-old wife and mother of two who is dying of cancer. She only has weeks to live. Check out Rachel's website where you can watch or download the video and audio. She's Dying

Windsor at Solapanel provides an anecdote of a pet dying and a question about pets and heaven to illustrate that saying “the Bible doesn’t say” has the presupposition that God has spoken clearly on things, that we don’t know everything, but that nevertheless all is in God’s good control. There is an authority beyond our theological musings. The Bible doesn’t say

Mounce has a brief discussion on the difference between the Greek terms for ‘blameless’ (αμωμος and ανεγκλητος (1 Cor. 1:8), απροσκοπος (Phil. 1:10), αμεμπτος (Phil. 2:15; 3:6; 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23), and αμομετος (2 Pet. 3:14)). The term απροσκοπος is about not giving offense, for αμωμος, the only reference to our present life is about what should be, not what is, and ανεγκλετος doesn’t mean perfection but ‘above reproach.’ Synonyms for Blameless (Monday with Mounce 36)

Burk points to a NY Times article that points out that President Obama supports policies that are substantively pro-abortion, while adopting rhetoric that makes it sound as if he’s not taken a side in the old culture war. He says one thing and does another, since he’s landed squarely on the pro-abortion side. Obama’s Hypocritical Strategy on Abortion

Phillips point to an article: Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining. Basically, atheists just pound the drum of how stupid people are for believing in God, and they indulge "in a philosophically primitive opposition of faith and reason that assumes that if science can't prove something, it doesn't exist." They also tend to rant about how God didn’t make the world to their liking. It’s really quite boring. “Atheism: The religious belief in a spontaneous, causeless, sourceless, purposeless, meaningless existence.” Atheists- on top of everything else, boring