Hays comments on a more conservative individual coming to reject inerrancy on account of differences between canonical Gospels. There are many answers, but one observation that ought to be obvious, but is routinely overlooked: He fails to consider the obvious fact that there really is more than one way to report the same event. Historical events have more than one aspect. Inerrancy and experience
Challies points to this ugly story: "In the months before their daughter was born in 2007, Deborah and Ariel Levy worried the baby might have Down syndrome. ... A doctor at the Legacy Center for Maternal-Fetal Medicine assured them that a sample of tissue taken from the placenta early in the pregnancy ruled out the developmental disability. ... But within days of the birth of their daughter, the Southwest Portland couple learned the baby did have Down syndrome. Had they known, they say, they would have terminated the pregnancy. Now they're suing in Multnomah County Circuit Court, seeking more than $14 million..." Rare Prenatal Testing Court Case
Phillips talks about the attacks on men, on fathers and husbands. In evangelicalism there are two extremes. On the one hand, men are responsibly for everything, in charge of everything, and chargeable with everything that goes wrong. On the other hand, there are those working hard to turn men into women, because men are pretty much always wrong, stupid, and contemptible. Being a man does mean taking responsibility, and this means having some delegated and limited authority – God tells those for whom the man is to care to respect him and subordinate themselves to his leadership (Ephesians 5:22, 24, 33b; 6:1-3). Phillips argues that ‘servant leadership’ has become a useless phrase because the first word commonly cancels the second. Rather, Christ is the chief example here. Men should regularly show appreciation for their wives. But women should make their husbands feel like kings regularly. Men, fathers, husbands- under fire from all sides
Engwer links to several resources on the authorship of John. He adds a line of evidence. John lived to an old age, and both internal/external evidence indicates 1-3 John are by the same author as the Gospel. Those epistles indicate that the author is old (e.g. ‘elder’). If another John wrote this Gospel, both were among Jesus’ closest disciples, were lose to Peter, involved in fishing, and lived to old age. So Guthrie: "In this Dionysius foreshadowed, as a man born before his due time, those modern schools of criticism which have peopled early Christian history with a whole army of unknown writers, whose works attained as great a prominence as their authors obtained obscurity." Another John-
T-fan has some comments on providing comments on blogs, whether a blog should be a free speech zone, and “secret apologetics” (i.e. those not done in the light of day). Response to Nick on Censorship vs. Publicity
MacArthur, writing about Luther’s formula ‘scripture and plain reason’, points out that i) discernment is not magic, but a cognitive act of understanding/interpreting/applying truth accurately. It is not contrary to reason; reason is rather subject to Scripture. Sound logical thinking is essential. ii) Discernment must always begin with Revelation. Otherwise reason degenerates into skepticism, rationalism, or secularism. iii) Scripture condemns human wisdom, not logic and reason, but humanistic ideologies. Scripture and Plain Reason
Manata responds yet further to a Scripturalist’s attempt to prove that knowledge is "giving an account of a true opinion". 1 Peter 3 is not even an attempt to define knowledge, Isaiah 8:19-20 isn’t either, Colossians 2 nowhere defined knowledge that way, etc. Scripturalists claim a high view of Scripture and yet are careless when it comes to actual exegesis. Gerety to Sudduth via Robbins via the Ouija Board
Hays comments on the same attempt as Manata dealt with. i) Citing a mathematical equation as a paradigm case for knowledge to illustrate scripturalism is ironic in that it is an extra-scriptural example. This also relies on induction, which scripturalists deny. ii) Scripture doesn’t teach that mathematical truths are necessary/unnecessary truths. iii) Given the empirical process involved in learning a language and reading Scripture, fluency by Scripturalist standards should, if they were consistent, amount to ignorance or opinion; and so too mastery of the English Bible. iv) Citing 1 Peter 3:15 is equivocal because Clark requires a certain type of account for knowledge, not just any. Also, one way early Christians gave an account was eyewitness testimony, which Scripturalists tell us is notoriously unreliable. v) Isaiah 8:20 speaks particularly to knowledge of the future in light of necromancy among the people. The verse is itself a sensory object, and it doesn’t restrict all knowledge to Scripture. “testimonies” are oral communications. v) Paul wrote the letter of Colossians and presupposed the validity of sense knowledge in so doing. Colossians 2:3 is about the knowledge of the Gospel in general, contrasting between what is hidden and revealed (going back to 1:26). A quick note on a quick note
Challies writes that a speaker pointed out at the Refocus conference that the problem with pastor’s conferences is that phenomenally successful pastors are paraded in front of you as an example. Voddie Baucham spoke on making disciples. i) The older should train the younger (i.e. contra age segregated ministries). ii) God has given us godly, manly elders as a disciple-making tool. iii) Men are to learn manhood and godliness from elders (contra female eldership), in the elder’s headship of his family; In his Christ-like character; In his Christ-like teaching. iv) Families are given for discipleship. Baucham says that we’re ‘more American than Christian’ using a systems analysis rather than organic approach to ministry, with many disqualifying a man over a sip of alcohol while lowering qualifications based on faithful children. i.e. "Don't you dare have a sip of alcohol but your family can go to hell." reFocus Conference (II)
MacDonald has a good reminder to embrace the criticisms that other Christians make of you. Good, honest critique is hard to come by. We must refuse to be distracted by those who refuse the mirror of God’s word and prefer self-imposed oblivion and move away from the fire whenever it gets too hot: Let’s be people of God’s word. “Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Your word.” (Ps. 119:67) Learn to love the Critic- God is Speaking!
Here’s Tripp observing that yes, there is non-sinful conflict, in that you can be an adversary of a sinful pattern in a person’s life because its motivated by a heart for the Gospel and a desire for that person’s good. Moreover, if there is a conflict due to perspectival difference (not a bad thing in itself; God has made us unique), we must be careful to do that which promotes love and unity. Paul Tripp on Non-Sinful Conflict
Bayly rips into “Emergent and so-called progressive Christians in this nation who voted for [Obama] this man of blood while hypocritically claiming to be "pro-life"” because they “have placed him in the position of making this nomination and will be responsible themselves for the blood of the babies their candidate's appointment to the Supreme Court will help to continue to shroud in our Constitution.” Here's a summary of President Obama's first hundred days in office you will find useful. NARAL agrees. His other note is that Obama’s nomination list was mostly women. AUL's short list for justice, with two notes to readers
Hays continues responding the Scripturalism yet again: The Scripturalist objects to the argument that the Bible is mediated through sense knowledge by saying, “How do you know you even have a Bible in your hands?” i) This is ironically an extra-scriptural objection to sense knowledge, and is thus self-defeating. ii) How in the world is this a Biblical objection to sense knowledge? The Scripturalist goes on to cite secular objections to sense knowledge. How then does citing the objections of Carneades, Aenesidemus, and Descartes constitute a Scriptural objection to sense-knowledge? According to Scripturalism extrascriptural objections wouldn’t be knowledgeable objections. Why is a Christian ‘empiricist’ obliged to answer such objections when they are nothing more then opinions, according to Scripturalism? Moreover, why invent an artificial precondition of knowledge, namely, that we can’t know anything or justifiably believe anything unless we can refute a skeptical thought-experiment. Many of the Scripturalist arguments beg the question by presupposing their sense knowledge in the arguments (e.g. visual perception of the Scriptures), or they will use generalized induction and extra-biblical concepts. Moreover, Cartesian demons, if arguments against empiricism, are equal arguments against Scripturalism. So too with reliability of memory. If the word of God is “communicated by God directly and immediately to the minds of men,” then the scriptures are superfluous. Clarkian epistemology represents a full-frontal assault on the Bible. Ink marks on a page
McKinley @ 9Marks recommends using a manuscript for pastors who are starting out (reading word for word is better than stammering), and notes for those with good content but poor delivery. He uses a ‘manu-line’, a manuscript with a derived outline, to control his own flow of thought so that he’s not tangential. [me too! :-)] Re- A Question About Preaching by Michael Mckinley
Thabiti uses a full manuscript for preaching, though he’s probably better with an outline. He’s still learning to preach, working on content and accuracy with the text. He wants to draw people to content rather than personality, and though he doesn’t expect it, he wants to leave behind his work in case it could ever benefit another. And write like you speak. RE- RE- A Question About Preaching by Thabiti Anyabwile
In preemptively dealing with some less than amicable supporters of NT Wright, Phillips makes this excellent point: “If I can't criticize anything Wright says without knowing everything Wright says... ...then Wright should be required to say everything any time he says anything — or he should say nothing at all.” He also deals with the arrogant objection that, well, Wright is ‘educated’ and his lack of education enslaves him to a Western mindset stuck in its own biases, unable to appreciate the nuances in Wright’s position. See, people sometimes use academic lingo, and things like “Western” and “Platonic” as dodges and covers that make them feel respectable in the world in the eyes of GOd-haters, and as a way, despite knowing that the Bible is offensive, to say you’re a Christian but look smarter than the other Christians. And also, since when did an academic degree confer a ‘get-out-of-criticism-free’ card? Doesn’t that raise the standard? Dialogue with a composite N. T. Wrightophile
Phillips points out that Masters is sadly in the bad end of the Spurgeon tradition in some ways. Spurgeon would call a man damned – because that man felt free to go to the theatre. Well, Masters’ comments about New Calvinists place him in that tradition. Phillips points out that Masters goes after New Calvinists for rejecting the “personal guidance of God in the major decisions of Christians (true sovereignty)", thereby striking a death-blow to wholehearted consecration,” and quotes Wilson to the effect that this is a man who had just chastised the charismatic elements in the New Reformed, like lifting hands – but making personal life-decisions through the gift of prophecy is ok! Why can’t you just do what the Bible says? Phillips thinks that Masters might be going after him - but more likely Kevin DeYoung. On Peter Masters' rant- in which I add only one small thought to Messrs. Turk and Wilson
Commenting on the ghastly actions of Senator “Ma’am” Boxer, who chewed out a brigadier general – who by the way, actually served his country – for calling her Ma’am [not a joke], Riddlebarger points out that since the seventeenth amendment, senators (like this one) no longer represent their constituents, no longer see themselves as public servants, but rather as an elite governing class above all the rabble (they now represent their parties, not the people) – which apparently qualified them to have a condescending attitude toward decorated soldiers. One Reason Why I'd Like to See the Seventeenth Amendment Repealed
Phillips writes about Tiller’s murder. According to apostate pastoral usurper (and president/dean of Episcopal Divinity School) Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, if you butcher helpless babies, you’re a ‘prayerful man who put your life at risk to protect others and died for it’, and you’re a real saint, but if you murder one who butchers helpless babies, you’re bad. Christians get their morality elsewhere, according to which neither is a martyr, and both are bad. What Tiller's murderer accomplished – 1
This is amazing: in Detroit "the average home price dipped to $11,533 in April..." From Challies A La Carte: A La Carte (6/9)
Ehrman has a math problem: Mill (1707), on 100 Greek mss, concluded there were 30000 variants. Ehrman notes we have 57 times the number of witnesses, and only about 10 times more variants. So do the subsequently discovered MSS have lower proportions of previously unknown variants? Were Mill’s numbers inflated? A mathematical conundrum
From ETC: “today came an evaluation from the national board of higher education in Sweden (Högskoleverket) who practically announced a frontal assault on theological education in our country. Many institutions (including the three free standing seminaries, and even some of the large faculties like Lund university) were severely criticized for being too focused on Christianity, etc, etc. The board threatens to recommend the government to withdraw the rights to grant degrees, if the institutions do not change a lot of things (our seminary will loose even the right to grant a basic degree in theology, although most of our teachers are PhD's).” A Black Day for Theology in Sweden
JT recommends the online software for the method of bible interpretation called arcing. BibleArc.com- New, Improved, Donated, and Whatever-You-Can-Afford
This post links to a comprehensive biography of Carson’s writings, as well as seven free books in PDF format from Carson. http://spurgeon.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/free-d-a-carson-books/
No comments:
Post a Comment